Are Electrons in Stationary Atoms Always Stationary?

  • Thread starter Thread starter flash
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Electrons
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of stationary electrons in the context of Compton scattering, particularly focusing on the implications of treating electrons as stationary during photon collisions. Participants explore the validity of this assumption and its relation to energy and momentum conservation.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants question the justification for assuming electrons are stationary in the derivation of the Compton scattering formula. Some express skepticism about the practicality of this assumption, while others discuss the implications of quantum mechanics on the concept of stationary electrons.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing insights into the nature of bound electrons and their kinetic energy. There is a recognition of the complexities involved in the energy scales of Compton scattering, and some guidance is offered regarding the treatment of binding energy.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that electrons are only stationary at absolute zero and question the relevance of this condition in practical scenarios. The conversation also touches on the concept of the Compton wavelength as a limiting factor in defining the position of particles.

flash
Messages
66
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


When considering conservation of energy and momentum in the collision between a photon and an electron (in Compton scattering for example), is it reasonable to worry about 'stationary' electrons?

The Attempt at a Solution


From what I can recall the derivation of the Compton scattering formula was based on a stationary electron. But how is this justified? Are electrons in stationary atoms always stationary?

Thanks for any help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
by any chance do you do PHYS2013 @ ANU?

imo, It is not sensible to worry about stationary electrons. Electrons will only be stationary at absolute zero, so they’re not really worth worrying about. An electron can only be stationary if its wavelength is infinity (ie. The electron hasn’t got a definable location).
 
flash said:
When considering conservation of energy and momentum in the collision between a photon and an electron (in Compton scattering for example), is it reasonable to worry about 'stationary' electrons?
I don't understand this question.

flash said:
From what I can recall the derivation of the Compton scattering formula was based on a stationary electron.
This is true. However, in QM, stationary is not a good concept. A related concept is the Compton wavelength, which is sometimes though of as the effective size of the particle, in the sense that, using photons as a probe, it cannot be resolved to a position more precisely than about a Compton wavelength.

flash said:
Are electrons in stationary atoms always stationary?
Well, they are bound, which is sort of like having negative kinetic energy.
 
turin said:
I don't understand this question.
Well, they are bound, which is sort of like having negative kinetic energy.

Um, no. Bound electrons have negative energy with respect to the vacuum level, but they always have a non-negative kinetic energy.

You need to think about the energy scales involved in Compton scattering. Treating the electron as unbound is equivalent to ignoring the binding energy of the electron. Does it make much difference if we neglect the binding energy of the electron?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K