Where does the first minimum appear in a double slit experiment with neutrons?

AI Thread Summary
In the discussion about the double slit experiment with neutrons, the wavelength was calculated using the de Broglie equation, yielding a value of approximately 6.6 x 10^-7 m. The first minimum's location was uncertain due to the lack of information about the detector's distance, leading to a focus on the angle instead. A calculation error regarding the mass of the neutron was identified, affecting the interpretation of results. Concerns were raised about the neutron's speed, questioning whether it should be expressed as a fraction of the speed of light. Ultimately, the conversation highlighted the challenges of determining minima in neutron diffraction experiments and the potential limitations of the information gained.
erok81
Messages
454
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



In a double slit experiment, a beam of neutrons with speed 0.6m/s is diffracted by two apertures which are 0.05μm apart.

a. What is the neutron wavelength?
b. Where does the first minimum appear?

Homework Equations



\lambda = \frac{h}{p}

dsin\theta =(m+\frac{1}{2})\lambda

The Attempt at a Solution



First off for the wavelength.

\lambda = \frac{h}{p}

I had to calculate p first. Which is just mv -> (1.657x10-27)(0.6) = 9.942x-28

Plugging that into the de Broglie wavelength forumla...

\lambda = \frac{h}{p} = \frac{6.63\times10^{-34}}{1.005\times10^{-27}} = 6.6\times10^{-7}

That answers part a.

Now part b I am stuck on. First I don't know how far away the detector is, so I can't really give a definite location. So I was just going to go with the angle.

Using dsin\theta =(m+\frac{1}{2})\lambda with m= 0

I get...

sin^{-1}\left[\frac{1}{2}\times\frac{6.6\times10^{-7}}{0.05\times10^{-6}}\right] = sin^{-1}(sin{\theta})

Before taking the arcsin I have a value of 6.597. Which obvisouly gives me a weird answer for theta. Weird answer being 1.571° and -2.574°.

Any ideas where I am going wrong?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think your wavelength is off by a factor of 1000.

Well, maybe not. Let me recheck my calculations.
 
I hope it is. That would give me a better answer. I rechecked and I had p wrong in the post, which I've corrected, but in my wavelength calculation I had it right. So lamda is correct...at least for me.
 
Your answer is correct. My mass was off by a factor of 1000. So the equation is telling you there is no minimum.

I'm wondering, though, if your velocity is correct; 0.6 m/s is pretty slow. Are you sure it's not supposed to be v/c=0.6, where c is the speed of light? Of course, if that's the case, the wavelength comes out incredibly small.
 
vela said:
Your answer is correct. My mass was off by a factor of 1000. So the equation is telling you there is no minimum.

I'm wondering, though, if your velocity is correct; 0.6 m/s is pretty slow. Are you sure it's not supposed to be v/c=0.6, where c is the speed of light? Of course, if that's the case, the wavelength comes out incredibly small.

That's what I thought as well so I emailed the TA. He said it was right.

But like you said, maybe there is no minimum. Since without knowing the distance to the detector I can't really give an answer, only the angle.
 
Although...it's a fairly popular method of using neutrons and double slit experiments. At least from google. So if there is no minimum, I wonder what kind of info can be gained from this type of experiment.
 
Probably not much, other than to place a lower bound on the distance between the scattering centers.
 
Perfect. Thanks for the help. Good to know I didn't mess it up. :)
 
Back
Top