Nuclear Interactions: Inelastic and elastic scattering

physmurf
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
I originally posted this in the homework section until I realized the homework section only covers through undergraduate courses. The course I am currently in is a graduate level Medical Physics course. So if you don't mind, here is the thread I posted in the homework section.

I am preparing for a Nuclear Physics test. One of the homework problems asks the following: Choose the proper neutron interaction type for each of the following scenarios and explain why. Interaction types: elastic, inelastic, (n,\gamma),(n,2n),(n,\alpha).

A. 10-MeV neutrons interacting with lead.
B. Thermal neutrons interacting with gold.
C. 1-MeV neutrons interacting with hydrogen in water.
D. Thermal Neutrons interacting with boron-10.
E. 6-MeV neutrons interacting with beryllium.



Instructors answer to part A: Both elastic and inelastic scattering are possible, but inelastic is more probable; This is because there is a large amount of "excess" energy (~17.5 Mev) available in the compound nucleus, and it takes little time (<10^{-14} sec) for a neutron to gain enough energy (~7 MeV to escape. This most likely would leave the residual nucleus at an excited state as there are so many low-lying excited states available in a Pb nucleus.

First off, I am unsure of where he gets the 17.5 MeV. Every calculation I use gives an excess energy of about 22 MeV. This was obtained using the following formula:
I used a table in the back of my book which gives the mass excess for different nuclei: I decided to use ^{208}Pb for the target nucleus since it is the most abundant form of Lead.

_\Delta Q = (m_A+m_a-m_b-m_B)c^2

Mass excesses are:
^{208}Pb: -23364 _\muu
Neutron: 8665 _\muu
^{209}Pb: -18926 _\muu

This gave me a result close to 12 MeV. When this is added to 10 Mev I get approximately 22 Mev.

In any event, even if this is 22 MeV, what will determine weather or not a Neutron is ejected from the compound nucleus as opposed to just some elastic scattering or \gamma gamma decay? This is perhaps my biggest "hang up" with this. What do any of you think?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Photons are generally unlikely if there is a process that happens via the strong interaction.

The 17.5 MeV might be an approximation from the average binding energy per nucleon, which is roughly 7.5 MeV for heavy nuclei (+10 for the incoming neutron). That doesn't take into account specific nuclides and even small variations in the binding energy per nucleon can lead to large differences in the overall binding energy, so this is a very poor approximation method.
 
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...
Back
Top