0% found this document useful (0 votes)
118 views22 pages

Pauli's Neutrino Hypothesis

The document discusses Pauli's neutrino hypothesis, which was proposed to resolve the energy paradox observed in beta decay. It outlines the properties of neutrinos, their helicity, and the experimental detection conducted by Clyde Cowan and Frederick Reines in 1956. The hypothesis posits that neutrinos are emitted during beta decay, allowing for the conservation of energy and momentum in the process.
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
118 views22 pages

Pauli's Neutrino Hypothesis

The document discusses Pauli's neutrino hypothesis, which was proposed to resolve the energy paradox observed in beta decay. It outlines the properties of neutrinos, their helicity, and the experimental detection conducted by Clyde Cowan and Frederick Reines in 1956. The hypothesis posits that neutrinos are emitted during beta decay, allowing for the conservation of energy and momentum in the process.
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 22

PAULI’S NEUTRINO HYPOTHESIS

Bhuvaneswari.
B
II- M.Sc physics
23PHYAO5
OUTLINE
 Introduction
 Continuous beta spectrum

 The energy paradox

 Neutrino hypothesis

 Properties of neutrino

 Neutrino helicity

 Experimental detection of neutrino


 The nuclear decays are primarily of three types :
alpha decay, beta decay and gamma decay
 After the discovery of alpha and beta rays in
1899 by Rutherford, their properties were
studied.
 Alpha mode of decay was predominant among
heavy nuclei.(Z > 83)
 Beta decay was important because it involved
the light and intermediate nuclei.
 The properties of beta particles differed greatly
from that of alpha particles.
 The alpha particle was He nuclei and beta particle

was similar to electron with different masses.


 The energy distribution of alpha particles were

discrete and the beta particles had a continuous


energy spectrum.
 Their range, absorption characteristics and hence

the interactions with matter were entirely different.


 The analogy to alpha decay couldn’t explain many

theoretical and conceptual problems.


 Radium emitted electron with different velocities covering a range
KAUFFMAN
 Reasoned with impure sources i.e the source to contain several elements and
due to scattering of the rays as it passes through.

SCHMIDT

LISE MEITNER AND


OTTO HAHN

WILLIAM
WILSON
KAUFFMAN

 Absorption of beta rays were according to exponential law

SCHMIDT
 Each decay had groups of beta rays with unique energy
 Exponential curve obtained was considered a superposition
of straight lines.

LISE MEITNER AND


OTTO HAHN

WILLIAM
WILSON
KAUFFMAN

SCHMIDT

 Assumption: If the electrons are homogeneous, the absorption was exponential


and vice versa.
LISE MEITNER AND
OTTO HAHN
 Confirmed Schmidt’s result , the electron absorption was exponential
 Supported by the shell model predictions of discrete energy levels and hence
particles emitted with unique energy.

WILLIAM
WILSON
KAUFFMAN

SCHMIDT
Questioned the
criteria of Radium as
exponential source No exponential
absorption for (heterogeneous absorption
homogeneity. ) occurred

LISE MEITNER
AND OTTO HAHN

Studied the Separated The


velocity homogeneous exponential
dependence of part by using absorption
electron magnetic field was not a
WILLIAM absorption criterion for
WILSON homogeneity
KAUFFMAN

SCHMIDT
Electrons lost
Electrons are
energy on rendered Lower values of
passing heterogeneous field indicate
through on passing decrease in
matterf. through matter velocity

LISE MEITNER
AND OTTO HAHN

Low energy experiment of Continous


electrons were passing beta energy
preferentially rays through spectrum
absorbed with the magnetic confirmed and
WILLIAM increasing field before also supported
WILSON thickness of and after by various
absorber pasing through experiments
matter
EXPERIMENT OF WILLIAM WILSON

= a - 0 mm
b - 0.489 mm
c - 1.219 mm
 A parent nucleus when it decays , it leaves a product nucleus of a definite energy.
 The total energy change must be irrespective of the modes of decay when the
reactants and products are same.
Consider the decay of 212Bi to 208Pb
212
Bi Po + β
212
Q = 2.254Mev 212
Bi 208
Tl + 4He Q= 6.207Mev
212
Po 208
Pb + 4He Q = 8.954 Mev 208
Tl 208
Pb + β Q=5.001 Mev

Total Energy Change = 11.208Mev Total Energy Change = 11.208Mev

 The energy change is equal in both modes by considering the energy of the β
particle to be its endpoint energy.(energy of daughter nuclei is very small)
 Thus , for mass energy balance , the endpoint energy has to be used.
 Average energy would not give such
agreement but it is preferred from the
continuous spectra.
 Average energy is only 1/3 rd of the

endpoint energy.
 This contradiction finds 2/3 rd of the

energy missing.
 Beta decay violated the law of

conservation of energy
 The possible solutions were :

 to disregard the conservation laws

 to account for the missing energy


 In 1930 , Wolfgang Pauli hypothesized a new particle called neutrino (ν)to solve this
problem.
 The energy was now shared by the daughter nucleus, β particle and the neutrino.
 Beta decay was no longer a two body process.
 In β- decay :

n p + β- + ν
 In β+ decay :

p n + β+ +
 The neutrino was given properties to comply with the conservation laws already
established.
PROPERTIES OF NEUTRINO

 The neutrino was emitted at the instant of beta decay and were undetectable.
 The neutrino has zero charge for the charge to be conserved.

n p + β- + ν
(0) (+1) (-1) (0)

 It has a very small mass compared to the mass of electron.


 For the angular momentum to be conserved , it should have a spin equal to ½ ħ

(fermi-dirac statistics)

d m ass n p + β- + ν
n mass n p + β + ν
- d
For o r
ve
For e r (ħ) (ħ) (½ ħ) (½ ħ) numb
e (½ ħ) (½ ħ) (½ ħ) (½ ħ)
e
numb
NEUTRINO HELICITY
 In non relativistic case
fermions represented by two component
spin states

 In the relativistic limit


helicity - a component of the
fermion spin in the direction of
motion of fermion.

 Helicity is the projection of spin on the momentum vector.


 The spin can be aligned with (helicity-plus) or against (helicity-minus) the

momentum.
 Helicity is not invariant under Lorentz transformation.
 Helicity of a neutrino is dependent of the frame
of the observer.
 If we are moving in the same direction of the

spinning body, it goes forward or backward or


at rest depending on the velocity of our motion
 Helicity is not an inherent property.
right handed , left handed ,
 An object that cannot be superimposed on its
helicity plus helicity minus
mirror image are called chiral.
 Chirality is an inherent property.

 By nature all neutrinos are left chiral and

antineutrinos right chiral.


EXPERIMENTAL DETECTION OF NEUTRINO
 Clyde cowan and Frederick Reines were the first to detect
the neutrino in 1956.
 The principle was to observe the inverse β- decay

+p n + β+
 The antineutrino flux from nuclear reactor was bombarded
on a hydrogenous material.
 The neutron released collides with proton and loses
energy.
 Cadmium being a neutron absorber captures the neutron by
(n,γ) reaction.
 The positron annihilates with an electron and releases
gamma radiation.
 The gamma rays due to these are measured by the scintillation counters
 Aftera prompt pulse due to annihilation of the electron positron pair , a
delayed pulse occurs after several microseconds.
 By experiment , it was inferred that the prompt pulses are only due to
annihilation and delayed pulses were only due to the neutrons
 This confirms the antineutrino(then indistinguishable with neutrino)
induced reaction.
 The ν +capture
inverse orbital electron n p + β- (Due to crossed
reaction symmetry)

 If the neutrino and antineutrino were identical DISTINGUISHED


NEUTRINO AND
+n p + β- ANTINEUTRINO !!
N AN D 𝛎
W A
CO S γ γ
N E SCINTILLATION
REI IM E NT e COUNTER

X P E R
E β+ TARGET TANK
n p WITH CADMIUM

SCINTILLATION
PRINCIPLE: DELAYED COUNTER
γ γ
COINCIDENCE METHOD
TARGET TANK
DELAY FOR COINCIDENCE- WITH CADMIUM
30μs
SCINTILLATION
COUNTER
REFERENCES
 “Nuclear physics”,Irving Kaplan,Addison-Wesley,2nd edition1964.
 Allan Franklin,”William Wilson and absorption of beta rays”,2002
 W.Wilson,”On the absorption of homogeneous beta rays by matter and on the
variation of the absorption of the rays with velocity”,1909
 F.Reines and C.L.Cowans.Jr,”Detection of the free neutrino”,1953
 F.Reines and C.L.Cowans.Jr “Detection of the free antineutrino”,1960
 James Dodd , Ben gripaios,” The ideas of particle physics”,fourth edition,2020
THANK YOU FOR YOUR
KIND ATTENTION AND
PATIENCE

You might also like