I Why is there such a difference between the total cross-section data? (simulation vs. experiment)

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the discrepancies between simulated and experimental total cross-section data in neutron-proton scattering. The simulation uses the Phase function method to calculate phase shifts and relates them to cross-sections through established equations. Significant differences arise in certain energy ranges due to the contributions of various states, particularly the dominance of the triplet and singlet states below 1 MeV and their reduced influence between 100 to 350 MeV. The findings suggest that other states contribute more significantly to the cross-section in these energy ranges. This analysis highlights the complexity of neutron-proton interactions and the need for careful consideration of all contributing states in simulations.
jhonconnor
Messages
7
Reaction score
4
TL;DR
I made a simulation of neutron-proton scattering phase shift to find the total cross-section, but the sim and exp data have a large difference of magnitude between them.
Well, I'm simulating a neutron-proton scattering phase shift. The equation that I solve numerically is the Phase function method and is
$$ \frac{d}{dr}[\delta_{i+1}] = \frac{2\mu}{\hbar^2}\frac{V(r)}{k^2}\sin(kr + \delta_i)$$
##\delta_i## is the phase shift for triplet and singlet state, ##\mu## is the reduced mass for neutron-proton, ##k=\sqrt{2\mu E_{cm}/\hbar^2}## is the wave number and ##V(r)## is the potential of interaction like Yukawa, Wood-Saxon, Square well potential, etc. I first find both scattering phase shift in degrees, putting ##y_{i+1} = 180/\pi## to make tables and graphs. Later, for ##\ell = 0## state the equation that relates phase shift with partial cross-section is
$$ \sigma_p = \frac{4\pi}{k^2}(\sin \delta_p)^2$$
At least, total cross-section is expressed as
$$ \sigma_{total} = \frac{3}{4}\sigma_t + \frac{1}{4}\sigma_s$$
where ##\sigma_t## and ##\sigma_s## is triplet and singlet cross-section respectively. But for some energy range is there such a large difference between sim and exp cross-section. I verify using "exp phase shift" and putting them into the equations, but the order of magnitude are the same that I obtain with my simulation. What is the reason for that? Note: ##k## have units of ##1/\mathrm{fm}## and in the table data is in Barn units.

Just try it with ##E_{lab}=##300 MeV ##\delta_t = 6.60## and ##\delta_s = –4.46## in degrees (with ##E_{cm} = m_pE_{lab}/(m_p+m_n)##)
 

Attachments

  • 1757103971017.webp
    1757103971017.webp
    62.9 KB · Views: 9
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, I found that it's due the contribution of other states. In other words, for energies below 1 MeV, ##^3\mathrm{S}_1## and ##^1\mathrm{S}_0## states have more contribution rather than ##\ell = 1,2,3,...## And, between 100 to 350 MeV, triplet and singlet states have less contribution than others.
For more information, see Table 2 in:
Khachi, A., Kumar, L., Awasthi, A., & Sastri, O. S. K. S. (2023). Inverse potentials for all ℓ channels of neutron-proton scattering using reference potential approach. Physica Scripta, 98(9), 095301.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes ohwilleke, Astronuc and PeroK
Thread 'Some confusion with the Binding Energy graph of atoms'
My question is about the following graph: I keep on reading that fusing atoms up until Fe-56 doesn’t cost energy and only releases binding energy. However, I understood that fusing atoms also require energy to overcome the positive charges of the protons. Where does that energy go after fusion? Does it go into the mass of the newly fused atom, escape as heat or is the released binding energy shown in the graph actually the net energy after subtracting the required fusion energy? I...