What is the Correct Approach to Solving the Deuteron Transcendental Equation?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on solving the deuteron transcendental equation derived from Krane's introductory nuclear physics textbook. The equation is expressed as ##k_{1} \cot{k_{1}R} = -k_{2}##, with specific definitions for ##k_{1}## and ##k_{2}## based on energy and potential. Participants calculated the parameter ##b##, with values ranging from ##0.4627## to ##0.4856##, and discussed the implications for the potential ##V_{o}##, which should approximate ##36 MeV##. The calculations involved converting MeV to Joules and using the reduced mass of the deuteron.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of transcendental equations in nuclear physics.
  • Familiarity with the concepts of reduced mass and potential energy.
  • Knowledge of energy conversion from MeV to Joules.
  • Proficiency in using the radial equations for quantum mechanics.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of transcendental equations in quantum mechanics.
  • Learn about the implications of reduced mass in nuclear interactions.
  • Explore numerical methods for solving transcendental equations.
  • Investigate the relationship between potential energy and binding energy in nuclear physics.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in nuclear physics, particularly those focusing on quantum mechanics and deuteron interactions, will benefit from this discussion.

James_1978
Messages
34
Reaction score
3
Homework Statement
I believe I solved the transcendental equation but the plot does not make sense.
Relevant Equations
##k_{1} \cot{k_{1}R} = -k_{2}##
##k_{1} = \frac{\sqrt{2m(E+V_{o})}}{\hbar}##
##k_{2} = \frac{\sqrt{-2mE}}{\hbar}##
##x = -\tan{bx}##
##x = \sqrt{\frac{-(V_{o} + E)}{E}}##
Dear Forum,

I am trying to solve a problem (4.6) from the introductory nuclear physics textbook by Krane. The problem is as follows:
Solving the deuteron using the radial equations gives the transcendental function,

##k_{1} \cot{k_{1}R} = -k_{2}##

Were

##k_{1} = \frac{\sqrt{2m(E+V_{o})}}{\hbar}##

And

##k_{2} = \frac{\sqrt{-2mE}}{\hbar}##

That gives the relations between and R. Show that this equation can be written in the form,

##x = -\tan{bx}##

Where

##x = \sqrt{\frac{-(V_{o} + E)}{E}}##

Evaluate the parameter b for R = 2fm. Note that is the reduced mass. Solve the transcendental equation.

When rearranging we get ##b## as.

##b = \frac{\sqrt{-2mE}}{\hbar}*R##

For the reduced mass ##m = \frac{1.67x10^{-27}}{2} kg##
For ##\hbar = 1.054x10^{-34} J-s##
For ##E = -2.22 MeV##

We are suppose to see that when solving the transcendental equation we get ##V_{o} = 36 MeV##. However we must have something wrong because the function does not clearly show how you infer the ##V_{o} = 36 MeV##. Any help is appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How much value of b you get ? Please let me know it for checking your result.
 
Last edited:
Dear Anuttarasmmyak

Here is what I got for b

##b = \frac{\sqrt{-2*\frac{1.67x10^{-27}}{2}*-2.22*1.602x10^{-13}}}{1.054x10^{-34}}##

Where ##b =2.3155x10^{14} m^{-1}##

Or with R I get ##b*R = 0.4856## I get ##V_{o} = 36##. I think this is correct. Just wanted to make sure.

1676640075854.png
 
b has no physical dimension.
 
Yes. I saw that. b*R is unit-less. My mistake.
 
Is MeV translated to MKSA Joule ?
 
Yes. I think you are asking in that I multiplied MeV*1.602x10^-13 to convert MeV to Joules. Is that what you are asking?
 
And you say R is 2 fm.
 
Yes, I use 2x10-15 m.
 
  • #10
James_1978 said:
Or with R I get
So you say b=0.4856.
 
  • #11
Yes. That is what I got.
 
  • #13
anuttarasammyak said:
So you say b=0.4856.
James_1978 said:
Yes. That is what I got.
I got a different value for ##b##. I calculated ##b=0.4627##.
 
  • #14
What did you use for E and mass of proton?
 
  • #15
I first calculated ##b## using the numbers you used and got a different answer. So I looked up the mass of a proton and neutron and found the reduced mass (##1.673\times 10^{-27}~\rm kg##) and used that to get the number above. Either way, I didn't get the value for ##b## you found. In both cases I used ##E_1 = -2.22~\rm MeV##.

In fact, I don't get the same values for the calculations you showed in post #3 for ##b## (really ##b/R##) or ##b R## (really ##b##). Moreover, your two values don't make sense if you're using ##R=2~\rm fm##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
5K