What Is the Minimum Initial Speed Required for an Electron-Atom Collision?

  • Thread starter Thread starter R2Zero
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Collision
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves an electron colliding with an atom, where the electron's initial speed must be determined based on conservation principles. The collision is characterized as inelastic due to the internal energy stored in the atom as a result of the interaction.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the conservation of momentum and energy, leading to the formulation of equations involving the initial speed of the electron and the speeds of both the electron and atom post-collision. There is a focus on deriving a quadratic equation and the implications of unit consistency in the equations.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively exploring the relationships between the variables and questioning the correctness of the equations provided in the original problem statement. Some have identified potential errors in the units of the equations and are working through algebraic manipulations to reconcile their findings with the expected results.

Contextual Notes

There is an emphasis on unit consistency and the implications of using different forms of the energy term in the equations. Participants are also reflecting on the validity of the provided equations and their derivations.

R2Zero
Messages
7
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



An electron, mass m, collides head-on with mass M, initially at rest. As a result of the collision, a characteristic amount of energy E is stored internally within the atom. What is the minimum initial speed v0 that the electron must have? (Hint: Conservation principles lead to a quadratic equation for the final electron speed v and a quadratic equation for the final atom speed V. The minimum value v0 follows from the requirement that the radical in the solutions for v and V be real.)


Homework Equations



P=mv
KE = mv^2/2

The Attempt at a Solution



At first glance, I can tell its a momentum problem since its a collision and I'm given variables for mass and velocity. Since characteristic energy E is stored as a result of the collision, I know that this is an inelastic collision because kinetic energy is not conserved.

Since I know that the conservation of momentum still applies, I can say:

(1) mv0 = mv + MV

And also, since I know that total energy is conserved, I can also say:

(2) (1/2)mv02 = (1/2)mv2 + (1/2)MV2 + E

I've worked through this problem several times, and I know that somewhere I will get a quadratic equation for v or V, depending on which of the two I eliminate, then end up using the quadratic formula to get a solution.

If I eliminate the variable V (via substitution or whatever technique), I'm "supposed" to end up with the equation:

(3) (1 + m/M)v2 - (2m/M)v0v + 2E - (1 - m/M)v02 = 0.

I understand the concepts behind how the result is gotten, the problem is that when I do the substitution, I get the same result, except I end up with a 2E/m instead of a 2E. I'm not sure if I'm right or not, because if I attach units to equation (3) that my book and the TA gave me, it doesn't make sense to add Joules (kg m^2/s^2) to an equation where the rest of the units are m^2/s^2.

Moving along, solving for v yields:

(4) v = (m/M)v0 (+/-) [v02 - 2E(m+M)/mM]^(1/2)

from there you can just say that the minimum value of v0 is the square root of 2E(m+M)/mM.


As I stated before, I know the basic concepts, but I'm not sure how they got (3) from (1) and (2). Did the book and the TAs make a mistake?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to Physics Forums.
R2Zero said:
If I eliminate the variable V (via substitution or whatever technique), I'm "supposed" to end up with the equation:

(3) (1 + m/M)v2 - (2m/M)v0v + 2E - (1 - m/M)v02 = 0.

I understand the concepts behind how the result is gotten, the problem is that when I do the substitution, I get the same result, except I end up with a 2E/m instead of a 2E.
An often useful way to spot an error is to look at the units associated with various terms in an equation. Look at the units of each term in the equation you are "supposed to" get:


(1 + m/M)v2: units are _____
(2m/M)v0v: units are _____
2E: units are _____
(1 - m/M)v02: units are _____
If these terms are to be added to and/or subtracted from each other, then the units must all agree. Do they? Finally, what happens if you have 2E/m instead of 2E?
 
Redbelly98 said:
Welcome to Physics Forums.

An often useful way to spot an error is to look at the units associated with various terms in an equation. Look at the units of each term in the equation you are "supposed to" get:


(1 + m/M)v2: units are _____
(2m/M)v0v: units are _____
2E: units are _____
(1 - m/M)v02: units are _____
If these terms are to be added to and/or subtracted from each other, then the units must all agree. Do they? Finally, what happens if you have 2E/m instead of 2E?

The units for 2E would be Joules, or kg (m^2/s^2), while the rest of the values are (m^2/s^2) or v^2, as the m/M units of kg/kg cancel out. Thus, 2E/m seems to work out in terms of units. I continued on the problem using 2E/m, and after tedious amounts of algebra I got that v0 must be at least [2E(m+M)/m]^(1/2), which looks similar to the book's answer of [2E(m+M)/(mM)]^(1/2).
 
R2Zero said:
The units for 2E would be Joules, or kg (m^2/s^2), while the rest of the values are (m^2/s^2) or v^2, as the m/M units of kg/kg cancel out. Thus, 2E/m seems to work out in terms of units. I continued on the problem using 2E/m, and after tedious amounts of algebra I got that v0 must be at least [2E(m+M)/m]^(1/2), which looks similar to the book's answer of [2E(m+M)/(mM)]^(1/2).
I agree that 2E/m is better than 2E, which must be wrong based on looking at the units. I haven't work this out myself to confirm your 2E/m.

However, note that your final answer has units of Energy1/2, which is not a velocity, whereas the book's answer does result in velocity units.

Whenever I get a result with the wrong units, I backtrack through my work to find the step where the units first became inconsistent. That's almost certainly where the error happened.
 
Redbelly98 said:
I agree that 2E/m is better than 2E, which must be wrong based on looking at the units. I haven't work this out myself to confirm your 2E/m.

However, note that your final answer has units of Energy1/2, which is not a velocity, whereas the book's answer does result in velocity units.

Whenever I get a result with the wrong units, I backtrack through my work to find the step where the units first became inconsistent. That's almost certainly where the error happened.

I reworked the problem and found my mistake somewhere when I was trying to simplify the huge radical that came from using the quadratic formula. I finally got the right answer from the book, |v0| > [2E(M+m)/Mm]1/2.

In short, the book answer was right, but equation (3) provided by the book and my TA was wrong, as I reached the answer using 2E/m in place of 2E. Thanks for everything Redbelly!
 
You're welcome. :smile: Hooray for units!
 

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
825
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
989
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
335
Views
17K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K