I Shooting an electron past a positive nucleus (trajectory)

Click For Summary
When an electron is shot horizontally past a proton, the trajectory can be analyzed as a two-body problem, though it simplifies to a one-body problem with the proton fixed. The distance of closest approach can be derived using conservation of energy and angular momentum principles. The relationship between scattering angle and trajectory can be expressed using hyperbolic parameters, specifically the formulas L² = γb²/a and E = γ/2a, where γ = e²/m. For further understanding, references to Rutherford scattering provide additional insights into the behavior of charged particles in such interactions. This analysis highlights the importance of classical mechanics in understanding particle trajectories in electromagnetic fields.
phantomvommand
Messages
287
Reaction score
39
TL;DR
An electron is shot horizontally. There is a proton located somewhere else, but not in the horizontal path of the electron. Is there a distance of closest approach, and how do you derive it? A physical explanation would be appreciated too. Feel free to use any variables.
An electron is shot horizontally. There is a proton located somewhere else, but not in the horizontal path of the electron. Is there a distance of closest approach, and how do you derive it? A physical explanation would be appreciated too.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's straightforward as a one-body problem but a little more subtle as a two-body problem. For the one-body (fixed proton) scenario it's enough to conserve energy and angular momentum about the proton. If you want the scattering angle/trajectory then you can relate these to the hyperbolic parameters ##a## and ##b## with the standard formulae ##L^2 = \gamma b^2 / a## and ##E = \gamma / 2a## [where ##\gamma = e^2/m##]; the proton is at the far focus.
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman and PeroK
You could search for Rutherford scattering. There's quite a bit online about this.
 
Thread 'The rocket equation, one more time'
I already posted a similar thread a while ago, but this time I want to focus exclusively on one single point that is still not clear to me. I just came across this problem again in Modern Classical Mechanics by Helliwell and Sahakian. Their setup is exactly identical to the one that Taylor uses in Classical Mechanics: a rocket has mass m and velocity v at time t. At time ##t+\Delta t## it has (according to the textbooks) velocity ##v + \Delta v## and mass ##m+\Delta m##. Why not ##m -...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K