Rutherford scattering with Coulomb cutoff

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on incorporating a Coulomb cutoff in classical Rutherford scattering to model electric screening, as described in Jackson's text. The setup involves a massive incident particle interacting with a less massive target particle, where the Coulomb force is modified to drop off at a radius r=a. This adjustment addresses the issue of an infinite cross section at θ=0 by limiting the interaction range. The participants speculate on the implications of this cutoff on momentum transfer, suggesting it results in a non-zero parallel momentum that contributes to scattering angles. The conversation highlights the need for clarity on how Jackson derives his equations and the functional forms he employs.
Reverend Shabazz
Messages
19
Reaction score
1
Hello, I am reading a section in Jackson discussing classical Rutherford scattering, and he mentions incorporating a cutoff in the Coulomb interaction in order to model electric screening. I am trying to understand how he applies this, as described below.

The set up is basically the classic Rutherford scattering set up with charges ##ze## and ##Ze## interacting with a small angle of deflection (i.e ##sin(\theta/2) \approx \theta/2##), leading to a differential scattering cross section of:
upload_2018-7-5_9-59-13.png


Now at ##\theta=0## of course the cross section is infinite, so he suggests modifying the Coulomb force interaction so as to drop off suddenly at ##r=a##:
upload_2018-7-5_10-7-12.png


So I am trying to understand how he obtains eq. 13.53...or at the very least what the set up is.

My guess is that he starts with a massive incident particle approaching a less massive target particle located at the origin. The massive incident particle is assumed to remain in a straight line, while the target particle deflects. But unlike the typical straight line approximation for this scenario, the typical Coulomb interaction remains the same only within a sphere of radius ##r=a## centered either on the origin or on the particle, beyond which the force is 0. Does this sound right?

Unfortunately, I couldn't find much on the internet pertaining to this question except for an article that I don't have access to: https://aapt.scitation.org/doi/10.1119/1.1987568
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-7-5_9-59-13.png
    upload_2018-7-5_9-59-13.png
    2 KB · Views: 738
  • upload_2018-7-5_10-7-12.png
    upload_2018-7-5_10-7-12.png
    16.9 KB · Views: 1,114
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't think he's doing anything more sophisticated than picking a functional form that behaves the way he wants: \theta^4 \rightarrow (\theta^2 + \theta_0^2)^2 has the right large-angle and small-angle behavior.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
I don't think he's doing anything more sophisticated than picking a functional form that behaves the way he wants: \theta^4 \rightarrow (\theta^2 + \theta_0^2)^2 has the right large-angle and small-angle behavior.
I thought so too, but I have doubt since he prefaces that formula by saying:
upload_2018-7-6_16-47-37.png

or, in an older version of his book:
upload_2018-7-6_16-52-18.png

The wording sounds like he's doing more than approximating ##\theta##. But I could be wrong..

For the record, the question with solution for 13.1 is found here: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~pran/jackson/P506/hw11a.pdf
It is just the simple scenario where the incident particle remains on a straight line trajectory and the Coulomb potential has no cutoff. As such, the only momentum transferred is perpendicular to the incident's velocity (see section 1.1 here for details: http://www.phys.lsu.edu/~jarrell/COURSES/ELECTRODYNAMICS/Chap13/chap13.pdf).

In the cutoff case, though, my thought is that the momentum transferred to the target in the direction parallel to the velocity will be non_zero in contrast to the no-cutoff case, and thus, when combined with the perpendicular momentum, will scatter the target at an angle. I would anticipate that, in calculating the resulting differential cross section, it would produce Jackson's result. Admittedly, I haven't tried slugging through the calculation yet.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-7-6_16-47-37.png
    upload_2018-7-6_16-47-37.png
    8.3 KB · Views: 635
  • upload_2018-7-6_16-52-18.png
    upload_2018-7-6_16-52-18.png
    10.6 KB · Views: 719
Thread 'Griffith, Electrodynamics, 4th Edition, Example 4.8. (Second part)'
I am reading the Griffith, Electrodynamics book, 4th edition, Example 4.8. I want to understand some issues more correctly. It's a little bit difficult to understand now. > Example 4.8. Suppose the entire region below the plane ##z=0## in Fig. 4.28 is filled with uniform linear dielectric material of susceptibility ##\chi_e##. Calculate the force on a point charge ##q## situated a distance ##d## above the origin. In the page 196, in the first paragraph, the author argues as follows ...
Thread 'Inducing EMF Through a Coil: Understanding Flux'
Thank you for reading my post. I can understand why a change in magnetic flux through a conducting surface would induce an emf, but how does this work when inducing an emf through a coil? How does the flux through the empty space between the wires have an effect on the electrons in the wire itself? In the image below is a coil with a magnetic field going through the space between the wires but not necessarily through the wires themselves. Thank you.
Back
Top