Mass for solving the nuclear energy level

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of energy levels and wavefunctions for protons in a finite square well potential, specifically for the deuteron and the nucleus ##^{48}Ca##. Participants explore the appropriate mass to use in these calculations, debating the implications of using reduced mass versus total mass in the context of nuclear physics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests using the reduced mass for the deuteron due to it being a two-mass system, while questioning the appropriate mass for ##^{48}Ca##.
  • Another participant proposes that for larger nuclei, the reduced mass and proton mass are nearly equivalent, but expresses difficulty in diagnosing the issue without seeing the results.
  • A participant shares their graphical solutions and calculations, indicating that their results do not align with Skyrme Hartree Fock calculations, particularly after accounting for Coulomb energy.
  • There is confusion regarding the number of solutions found for the ##s## states, with one participant asserting that only two solutions should exist based on Skyrme Hartree Fock calculations.
  • Participants express uncertainty about the calculations and the interpretation of Coulomb energy in relation to the energy levels derived.
  • One participant clarifies that their approach is guided by a textbook, but it is not a standard textbook problem.
  • A request for clarification is made regarding the understanding of Coulomb energy and its impact on the energy levels calculated.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the appropriate mass to use for ##^{48}Ca## or the validity of the calculated energy levels. Multiple competing views remain regarding the interpretation of results and the expected number of solutions for the ##s## states.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved aspects regarding the assumptions made in the calculations, particularly concerning the treatment of mass and Coulomb energy. The discussion highlights a dependence on specific definitions and approaches from literature, which may not universally apply.

just_mb
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hi all,
I'm trying to solve a problem of finite square well for the ##s## states graphically. The task is to find energy levels and wavefunctions of proton in a spherically symmetric potential, first for deuteron then ##^{48}Ca##. What makes me confused is the mass. For deuteron, the mass used is the reduced mass because it's a two-masses system. Using that, the energy from my calculation is similar to that from literature. But what about the ##^{48}Ca##, what mass should I use? When I use reduced mass of ##m_{proton}(19 \times m_{proton} + 28 \times m_{neutron})/(20 \times m_{proton} + 28 \times m_{neutron})## which I found from a literature, the energies don't match with realistic Skyrme Hartree Fock calculations (figure attached). When I use the total mass ##(20 \times m_{proton} + 28 \times m_{neutron})##, I found 7 ##s## energy levels as oppose to 2, as shown in the figure. Please help me, I have been searching through tons of books and journals with no luck.

Screen Shot 2019-07-07 at 11.54.03 am.png
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Use the reduced mass, or the proton mass - they are nearly the same for larger nuclei.
It is hard to tell what went wrong if you don't show your results.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: just_mb
mfb said:
Use the reduced mass, or the proton mass - they are nearly the same for larger nuclei.
It is hard to tell what went wrong if you don't show your results.
Thanks. That's what I used and this is the graphical solutions that I got.
246252

where ##\xi## is given by $$\xi = \sqrt{\frac{2m(V_0 - |E|)}{\hbar^2}}a$$ where ##V_0 = 45 \, MeV##, and ##a = ½A^⅓ = 4.36\, fm##. As shown in the graph, the solutions are ##\xi = 2.702## and ##5.298## which according to the equation above correspond to ##E = 1.04\, MeV## and ##13.73\, MeV##. The coulomb energy for ##^{48}Ca## is ##75\, MeV##. If I substract those energies by Coulomb energy, the results are nowhere near those in Skyrme Hartree Fock calculations. What's wrong with my calculation?
 

Attachments

  • 1562501890608.png
    1562501890608.png
    7.3 KB · Views: 321
It is still not very clear what you did, and it is surprising that you only found two solutions.

Is this part of some textbook problem (so you know this approach should give a useful answer)?
 
mfb said:
It is still not very clear what you did, and it is surprising that you only found two solutions.
Only the ##s## states need to be solved so I think there are only two solutions, as suggested by Skyrme Hartree Fock calculations. I am also confused with that solution. In the picture, for example, the ##0s1## state of protons only differ by about 1 MeV from that of neutrons. The difference is caused by Coulomb energy. But from my calculation, the Coulomb energy is 75 MeV. Am I understanding it correctly? Can you please explain this to me?

mfb said:
Is this part of some textbook problem (so you know this approach should give a useful answer)?
No, it's not. But we follow the guides from Quantum Mechanics by Schiff.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K