DetailedBalance: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
a) Express <math>B(T_{\lambda}; i \rightarrow f)</math> in terms of the reduced matrix element <math>(f|| T_{\lambda}|| i)</math> and show that it does not depend on the initial projection <math>M_i</math>. | a) Express <math>B(T_{\lambda}; i \rightarrow f)</math> in terms of the reduced matrix element <math>(f|| T_{\lambda}|| i)</math> and show that it does not depend on the initial projection <math>M_i</math>. | ||
b) Establish the detailed balance between the reduced transition probabilities of the direct <math>i \rightarrow f</math>, and inverse <math>f \rightarrow i</math> processes. | b) Establish the detailed balance between the reduced transition probabilities of the direct <math>i \rightarrow f</math>, and inverse <math>f \rightarrow i</math> processes. ''Hint: This is just the ratio between <math>B(T_{\lambda}; i \rightarrow f)</math> and <math>B(T_{\lambda}; f \rightarrow i)</math> '' | ||
Line 50: | Line 50: | ||
It is obvious that this result does not depend on <math>M_i</math> | It is obvious that this result does not depend on <math>M_i</math> | ||
b) All that is missing to find the detailed balance relation is <math>B(T_{\lambda}; f \rightarrow i)</math>. This is done in the same way as part a). | |||
<math>B(T_{\lambda}; f \rightarrow i)= (f|| T_{\lambda}|| i)^2 \sum_{\mu M_i} | |||
\left( \begin{array}{lll} | |||
J_f & \lambda & J_i \\ | |||
-M_f & \mu & M_i | |||
\end{array} \right) | |||
\left( \begin{array}{lll} | |||
J_f & \lambda & J_i \\ | |||
-M_f & \mu & M_i | |||
\end{array} \right)</math> | |||
Note, the only difference is the sum over <math>M_i</math> | |||
Thus, we have <math>B(T_{\lambda}; i \rightarrow f)= \dfrac{(f|| T_{\lambda}|| i)^2}{2J_f+1}</math> | |||
And the detailed balance relation is: <math>\frac{B(T_{\lambda}; i \rightarrow f)}{B(T_{\lambda}; f \rightarrow i)}=\frac{2J_f+1}{2J_i+1}</math> |
Revision as of 16:41, 12 April 2010
Consider a transition from between two states of the nucleus with spins and , respectively. The transition probability is proportional to the squared matrix element where is a hermitian tensor operator of rank responsible for the process. Define the reduced transition probability
as a sum of squared matrix elements over final projections and operator projections .
a) Express in terms of the reduced matrix element and show that it does not depend on the initial projection .
b) Establish the detailed balance between the reduced transition probabilities of the direct , and inverse processes. Hint: This is just the ratio between and
SOLUTION:
a) According to the Wigner-Eckert theorem, the entire dependence of the matrix element of a tensor operator on the magnetic quantum numbers is concentrated in the vector coupling coefficients,
We obtain the rate by squaring this and summing over and
Using the orthogonality condition:
Which leads us to our final result:
It is obvious that this result does not depend on
b) All that is missing to find the detailed balance relation is . This is done in the same way as part a).
Note, the only difference is the sum over
Thus, we have
And the detailed balance relation is: