Semi-Empirical Mass and E=mc^2 close, but both off? Binding Energy calc

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the binding energy of the isotope 11-Na-18 using both the semi-empirical mass formula (SEM) and Einstein's mass-energy equivalence formula, E=mc². The calculated binding energy per nucleon using the SEM method is 7.2852 MeV/A, while the E=mc² calculation yields 5.8943 MeV. The discrepancy of approximately 0.3 MeV between the two methods is attributed to the inclusion of excess mass in the E=mc² calculation, which is less accurate for lighter nuclei. The SEM formula is recognized as a model that improves in accuracy with larger nuclei.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of binding energy calculations in nuclear physics
  • Familiarity with the semi-empirical mass formula (SEM)
  • Knowledge of mass-energy equivalence (E=mc²)
  • Basic programming skills in Python for implementing calculations
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore advanced applications of the semi-empirical mass formula for heavier nuclei
  • Learn about the implications of mass defect in nuclear stability
  • Investigate the properties of isotopes near the double proton decay line
  • Study the differences in binding energy per nucleon between stable and unstable nuclei
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, nuclear engineers, and students studying nuclear physics who are interested in binding energy calculations and the behavior of isotopes.

MagneticNeutron
Messages
1
Reaction score
2
Homework Statement
Calculate the binding energy of 11-Na-18
Relevant Equations
E = mc^2
Semi-Empirical Mass Formula = SEE CODE BELOW
Hi,

I am calculating the binding energy of 11- Na- 18

Stats:

Table of nuclides has BE/A = 6.202276 ± 0.006249 MeV
m used = 18.026878252 amu

E= mc^2 answer = 5.894327537620224 MeV

Semi Empirical Answer = 5.919667778950925 MeV
Including excess mass in E = mc^2 method

1 - Calculate energy of mass defect

(18.026878252 amu - (11*mP + 7*mN))*(convKilogram) * c^2 => 106.097 MeV

2 - Add in energy of excess mass

106.097 MeV + 25.036931 MeV of excess mass from table

3 - Divide by A

BE/A = 131.134826 MeV / 18 = 7.2852 MeV/A

So I am looking for hints as to why my SEM formula inputs of A = 18 and Z = 11 are coming out so close to an E =m*c^2 calculation that does not include the excess mass, why they are both off by about 0.3 MeV, and why the inclusion of the excess mass in the E = m*c^2 formula comes out way off.I also understand that the SEM formula is a just a model, and that it gets more accurate as the nuclei get larger and heavier. If what I am seeing is simply the error, cool

Code:
Python:
from semiEmpBind import semiEmpBind

massProton = 1.00728;
massNeutron = 1.00867;
lightSpeed = 2.99792458*10**8;
# 11 - Na - 18

massExcess = ((25.036931 * 10**6) / (lightSpeed**2))

massConst = 11*massProton + 7*massNeutron;

massDefect = 18.026878252 - massConst;
massDefect = massDefect * 1.66054*10**-27; #in kg

bindingEnergy = (-1) * massDefect * (lightSpeed)**2;

#in electron Volts

BE = bindingEnergy * 6.242*10**18  / (10**6); #add in mass excess in beginning

perNucleonBE = (25.036931 + BE)/ 18

print("E= mc^2 answer = " , perNucleonBE)semiEmpAns = semiEmpBind(18.0,11.0)/18.0

print("Semi Empirical Answer = " ,  semiEmpAns)

Python:
def semiEmpBind(A, Z):

    N = A-Z; #this is the number of neutrons
    
    aV = 15.76
    aSurf = 17.81
    aC = 0.711
    aA = 23.702
    aP = 11.18
    
    remA = A %2
    remZ = Z%2
    remN = N%2
    
    #determine paring term
    if (remA == 0 and remN == 0 and remZ == 0):
        delNot = 34/(A**0.75)
    elif (remA == 0 and remN == 1 and remZ == 1):
       delNot =  -34/(A**0.75)
    else:
        delNot = 0

    bindEnergy = aV*A - aSurf*(A**(2/3)) - aC*((Z*(Z-1))/(A**(1/3))) - aA*(((A -2*Z)**2)/A) + delNot
    return bindEnergy
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Might point out that "excess mass" (binding energy) for an unstable nucleus like 18Na is less per nucleon than stable nuclei like 18O. I don't see a problem with excess mass ~ 0. Try 22Na (well known) as a comparison. 18Na is also near the double proton decay line.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
18K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K