How Thick Should the Wall Be to Scatter Half the Particle Beam?

leviathanX777
Messages
39
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A beam of particles strike a wall containing 2 x 10^29 atoms per m^3. each atom behaves like a sphere of radius 3 x 10^-15 m. Find the thickness of the wall that exactly half the particles will penetrate without scattering. What thickness would be needed to stop all but one particle in 10^6

Homework Equations



the mean free path (λ) = 1/nσ


The Attempt at a Solution



I'm not sure how to start the solution. I can't find an equation that will bring the thickness of the wall into the problem

Cheers.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
hmmm... you could consider the surface area effectivley covered by the spheres... what is that relative to the wall area in terms of the thickness?
 
I do not know the wall area, it didn't say.
 
Cool problem. I would approach it this way: The microscopic cross-section is ~ the area presented by a single nucleus, so in this case \sigma = \pi*(3x10-15 m)2 = 2.83 x 10-29 m2

Once you have that, you can calculate the macroscopic cross section using \Sigma=N\sigma and then you can use the exponential attenuation formula I = I0exp(-\Sigmat) to solve for the penetration depth t.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top