Understanding the Form Factor and its Role in Rutherford Scattering

In summary, Rutherford's Equation for scattering alpha particles on the nucleus is:N(\theta)=\frac {K} {sin^4 (\frac {\theta} {2}})we can't compare this function directly to our data since it goes about the 0-angle, which leads to infinite, so we log transform it (here, I've assumed natural logarithm, but have since tried log base 10 just to be sure)\log N = log K - 4log(sin(\frac{\theta} {2}) )So I plot logN vs log(sin(theta/2)) to verify a slope of -4. I don't
  • #1
Pythagorean
Gold Member
4,408
320

Homework Statement



This is for a lab class, I'm writing a report and giving a presentation. Tomorrow is the day and I've just received the final remarks on my lab writeup, most of which are simple and obvious enough, but this one really bugs me: I think my teacher is wrong.

Rutherford's Equation for scattering alpha particles on the nucleus is:

[tex]N(\theta)=\frac {K} {sin^4 (\frac {\theta} {2}})[/tex]

we can't compare this function directly to our data since it goes about the 0-angle, which leads to infinite, so we log transform it (here, I've assumed natural logarithm, but have since tried log base 10 just to be sure)

[tex]\log N = log K - 4log(sin(\frac{\theta} {2}) )[/tex]

So I plot logN vs log(sin(theta/2)) to verify a slope of -4. I don't quite get 4 (I get -3.5 for gold and -4.4 for silver), and I don't get a straight line, and in the red ink responses, there's a lot of "no! not in radians! do it in degrees! so that you won't get the bending at the edges!".

The Attempt at a Solution



I don't agree with my professor. I think the sin of theta in degrees or radians should be the same. Perhaps I am misunderstanding him. I made the mistake of putting units of 'radians' on my plot of the logarithmic transform of Rutherford's equation. I realize now the plot should be unitless. I'm wondering if I confused him with this, or whether he's making a point I'm missing.

Thank you for your time.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
the plot for gold if you're interested:

http://upload.imgspot.com/u/07/350/15/goldlog.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #3
I don't think he is correct, I agree with you. Sin(180) = Sin(pi) etc, it doesn't matter. If he think it matters, he must demonstrate this mathematically. But it is customary to have the scattering angle in degrees, in the plot (axis-labels).

The things is that you should not get a totaly straight line, due to the fact that a nucleus has shape, Rutherford is just for point particle, you must include a formfactor to get better (but not optimal) fit to data.

Anyway, go to him and make him demonstrate that to you, that Sin should be in degrees.
 
  • #4
malawi_glenn said:
I don't think he is correct, I agree with you. Sin(180) = Sin(pi) etc, it doesn't matter. If he think it matters, he must demonstrate this mathematically. But it is customary to have the scattering angle in degrees, in the plot (axis-labels).

The things is that you should not get a totaly straight line, due to the fact that a nucleus has shape, Rutherford is just for point particle, you must include a formfactor to get better (but not optimal) fit to data.

Anyway, go to him and make him demonstrate that to you, that Sin should be in degrees.

Yeah, I straightened him out :P For about an hour there, I thought I that maybe I had missed something all these years playing with trig functions. It's funny how much faith we put into professors, sometimes.

Anyway, thanks for pointing out the scattering equation is based on a point particle. That might come in handy when I present this tomorrow.
 
  • #5
Yes, I often trust my professors much. But in the end, I must go and say that they had wrong in their lecture notes etc, and they are just happy when someone points out their misstakes:) Thats also what differs from a good and less good student. A good student trust himselft to a higher degree and see the misstakes the teacher does. I had a professor who get a bit "angry" when nobody in the class room points out his misstakes and asks questions. Thats a way to see that the students are following :)

Yeah, you can find the concept of formfactor in almost any nuclear physics book. It is just the Fourier transform of the charge distribution function. Then the total differential cross section becomes:

[tex] N(\theta ) = N(\theta )_{Ruth} \cdot \vert F(\theta ) \vert ^2 [/tex]

where [itex] F(\theta ) [/itex] is the form factor.

When using form factor, one can insert different models of the charge distribution (which is very similar to the nucleon distribution, protons and neutrons are belived to be very homogenously distributed in the nucleus) and playing with their parameters. For example one can model the nucleus as a square well, gaussian, fermi distribution etc. =)

Good luck!
 
Last edited:

FAQ: Understanding the Form Factor and its Role in Rutherford Scattering

1. What is Rutherford Data Analysis?

Rutherford Data Analysis is a method of analyzing data collected from experiments involving the scattering of alpha particles by a thin gold foil, which was first performed by Ernest Rutherford in 1911. This technique allows scientists to determine the structure and properties of atoms and molecules.

2. How does Rutherford Data Analysis work?

Rutherford Data Analysis involves measuring the angles at which alpha particles are scattered by a thin gold foil. Based on the pattern of scattering, scientists can calculate the size and charge of the nucleus, as well as the distance between the nucleus and the electrons.

3. What are the applications of Rutherford Data Analysis?

Rutherford Data Analysis has many applications in the field of nuclear physics and chemistry. It has been used to determine the structure of atoms, study radioactive decay, and investigate the properties of various nuclei and subatomic particles.

4. What are the limitations of Rutherford Data Analysis?

One limitation of Rutherford Data Analysis is that it only works for atoms with a relatively simple structure, such as hydrogen and helium. It also does not take into account the effects of quantum mechanics, which can affect the scattering of particles at the atomic level.

5. How has Rutherford Data Analysis advanced over time?

Since its initial discovery, Rutherford Data Analysis has undergone many advancements and improvements. These include the use of more precise instruments, such as particle accelerators, and the incorporation of modern statistical methods to analyze the data. These advancements have allowed for a deeper understanding of the structure of matter at the atomic level.

Back
Top