How to Correct for 3D Scattering in Rutherford's Gold Foil Experiment?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on correcting the counting rates in Rutherford's gold foil experiment due to the 3D scattering of alpha particles. The primary challenge is to adjust the measured count rates to account for the scattering that occurs above and below the detector's line of sight. Participants suggest using solid angle calculations and geometric considerations, specifically the relationship between the length of the detection plane and the corresponding segment of the scattering cone, to derive a scaling factor for accurate results.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Rutherford's gold foil experiment
  • Familiarity with solid angle calculations
  • Basic geometry related to conic sections
  • Knowledge of angular distribution in particle physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research solid angle calculations in particle detection
  • Study the geometry of conic sections and their applications in physics
  • Explore methods for extrapolating data from angular distributions
  • Learn about statistical corrections in experimental physics
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, experimental physicists, and educators involved in teaching or conducting experiments related to particle scattering and detection methodologies.

thelibertine1
Messages
8
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Hey. I've just conducted Rutherford's gold foil scattering experiment and am a little stuck on a part of the analysis. One of the objectives of the lab script is;

'To correct the counting rates measured in one plane for the fact that the foil scatters in a 3D cone'

So the detector only detects alpha particles in a line and doesn't account for others scattering above and below it. I've plotted the count rate as a function of the angle measured with the detector, how will this correction scale my results and how do I calculate this scaling factor?

Homework Equations



See attachment

The Attempt at a Solution



I attemped using a solid angle formula but got again stuck with not knowing the dimensions.

Thanks
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
I don't understand what you are looking for, if you are looking for the stuff missed by the detector, that isn't a correction it's an extrapolation and in fact is the equation for the entire angle dependent distribution. I think you need to correct for the fact that your conic distribution was flattened onto a plane. So look at chords for circles
 
Yes the conic distribution was flattened onto a plane, does that mean the count rate at each angle is actually less than measured?
 
yes since that has the effect of bringing the points closer together
 
So how can I work out how much less counts should me measured? Thanks by the way I think I get the idea
 
well the ratio of the length of the plane and the corresponding segment of the circumference is pretty much the indicator. But I am not familiar with the geometry of your apparatus so I'm working on assumption here
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K