Probability of Beta Particle Detection from Uniformly Covered Surface

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the probability of beta particle detection from a uniformly covered radioactive surface. Participants explore the theoretical framework for determining the percentage of emitted particles that will hit a detector positioned above the surface, considering factors such as geometry, emission angles, and integration in spherical coordinates.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • FastLineare describes the setup involving a 10 cm x 10 cm radioactive surface and a circular detector with a diameter of 3.9 cm, seeking methods to calculate the probability of detection.
  • FastLineare initially proposes a ratio of areas to estimate the detection probability but questions the validity of this approach due to the offset distance and the assumption of uniform emission from all points.
  • Another participant suggests using spherical coordinates to find the angles that the detector spans, indicating that the integral of the solid angle can help in determining the detection probability.
  • FastLineare expresses confusion about the calculation of 11.8% probability and seeks clarification on the derivation of the function f(theta) = sin(theta) used in the integration.
  • Participants discuss the integration process in spherical coordinates, with one participant explaining how they arrived at the 11.8% figure by integrating over the angles spanned by the detector and dividing by the total solid angle.
  • FastLineare acknowledges their lack of recent experience with double integrals and appreciates the guidance provided by others in the thread.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants present multiple approaches and calculations regarding the probability of detection, leading to differing interpretations and results. The discussion remains unresolved, with no consensus on the correct method or final probability value.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the assumptions made about uniform emission and the impact of the detector's position on the calculations. There are also unresolved questions about the integration techniques and their application in this context.

FastLineare
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
We have a surface that is 10 cm x 10 cm. That surface is uniformly covered with a radioactive material. When radioactive material decays, it has a equal probability of emitting radioactive particles, in this case beta particles, in any direction (360 degrees). We have a detector that, mathematically, you can think of as a plane. It is a circle with a diameter of 3.9 cm. The detector is located 0.47625 cm above the center of the 10 cm x 10 cm surface. If we assume that we have an equal probability that radiation particles may emit in any direction, that all surfaces of the 10 x 10 plate have equal levels of radioactivity, and that the emissions are taking place from all surfaces at constant rates, find the probability that emissions will hit the detector. By probability, what I mean is, what percentage of total emissions from the source will hit the detector.

Any thoughts or recommended algorithms would be appreciated. I've tried a few different approaches but am not confident in the theoretical results I've obtained.

Thanks,

FastLineare
 
Physics news on Phys.org
10x10cm^2 / area of sphere
 
malawi_glenn said:
10x10cm^2 / area of sphere

Thank you for your response.

Percentage = 100_cm^2/(11.9_cm^2) = 8.40 = 840%

On the other hand, if I flip the ratio,

Percentage = 11.9_cm^2/100_cm^2 = 11.9%

I thought of trying this yesterday; however, I figured this was too good to be true. Shouldn't the percentage be dependent of the offset distance as well? I also struggled with the idea that all points on the emission surface are emitting particles (in reality they are not but to obtain a worst case senerio this assumption was made). Therefore, this would cover all of Real space except what is taken in by the detector.

Thanks,

FastLineare
 
oh, dude, I read 3.9 METERS ! ;-)Consider this picture in the x-y plane (wait til approved by moderator). find which angles theta and phi the detector spans.

You know spherical coordinates yes? http://mathworld.wolfram.com/SphericalCoordinates.html

Thus integral
[tex]\int _ {\phi = 0}^{2\pi}d\phi \int _ {\theta = 0}^{\pi}sin \theta d\theta = 4\pi[/tex]

You need to know how big integral will be when integrating over the angles considered in the picture. Really easy, answer is 11.8%.
 
malawi_glenn said:
oh, dude, I read 3.9 METERS ! ;-)


Consider this picture in the x-y plane (wait til approved by moderator). find which angles theta and phi the detector spans.

You know spherical coordinates yes? http://mathworld.wolfram.com/SphericalCoordinates.html

Thus integral
[tex]\int _ {\phi = 0}^{2\pi}d\phi \int _ {\theta = 0}^{\pi}sin \theta d\theta = 4\pi[/tex]

You need to know how big integral will be when integrating over the angles considered in the picture. Really easy, answer is 11.8%.


Ok...I think I see how to handle this.

What I did was computed the dbl integral above symbolically to get,

[tex]\int _ {\phi = 0}^{2\pi}d\phi \int _ {\theta = 0}^{\pi}sin \theta d\theta = -(phi-2*pi)*(cos(theta)+1) = 4\pi[/tex]

Now I can describe phi and theta in terms of the offset distance between the source and the detector so that I can optimize the efficiency.

Thanks,

FastLineare
 
One question I have for you though...How did you come up with the 11.8%? I'm also curious where f(theta) = sin(theta) comes from in this formula?

Thanks for your input.
 
don't you know how integration of volumes in spherical coordinates work?

I suggest this introduction:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_coordinates

(look for surface element, keep r fixed)

I got 11.8% by integrating phi from 0 to 2times the angle spanned by the detector in the picture. And then the same thing for theta integration. Then I took the result and divided with the full solid angle (4pi).
 
malawi_glenn said:
don't you know how integration of volumes in spherical coordinates work?

I suggest this introduction:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_coordinates

(look for surface element, keep r fixed)

I got 11.8% by integrating phi from 0 to 2times the angle spanned by the detector in the picture. And then the same thing for theta integration. Then I took the result and divided with the full solid angle (4pi).

I really appreciate the advice! The last time I computed double integrals was in Calc 3 a couple years ago. I now see that using integrals in practice is slightly different than when computing them in a class. I understand the basic concepts, but am rusty on the details.

Thanks a lot!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
3K