Pozitron-Electron interaction(anihilation)

  • Thread starter Thread starter pop_ianosd
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the conservation of energy in positron-electron annihilation, specifically regarding the energy of the resulting photons. One viewpoint suggests that the equation should be 2m0c2 + T = 2ε + Ek, arguing that the atom becomes ionized after the electron vanishes, thus increasing its energy by Ek. The opposing view presents the equation as 2m0c2 + T + Ek = 2ε, implying that Ek should be added to the total energy before annihilation. The crux of the debate lies in whether Ek, defined as positive, should be subtracted or added in the conservation equation. This disagreement highlights the importance of correctly accounting for binding energy in energy conservation principles.
pop_ianosd
Messages
12
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


A given pozitron with T kinetic energy is approaching an electron bound to a hard nucleus(in the K energy level, and the ionization energy for this level, Ek(>0), is given).
The energy of the two resulting photons is to be determined.

Homework Equations


Conservation of energy.

The Attempt at a Solution


So I wrote the conservation of energy as follows:
2m0c2 + T = 2ε + Ek ( ε is the energy of one photon )
Let me explain my way of thinking: After the anihilation, the electron has vanished, so the atom has become a ion(so it's energy has increased by Ek).

However, the proposers of the problem consider the conservation of energy as follows:
2m0c2 + T + Ek = 2ε;

So who is right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If Ek is defined to be positive, it should be subtracted on the left side (or added on the right side).
Otherwise you can violate energy conservation: Take a free electron, let it get caught by a nucleus (emitting energy). Add a free positron, and get more than 2*511keV as energy => you gained the binding energy two times.
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Back
Top