LIM ZHENG LIANG; A0137567U

1
COMPTON SCATTERING

Retrieved from : https://www.flickr.com/photos/mitopencourseware/4706061251

 Outline 2

 History
 Theory
• Compton Scattering
• Differential cross section(classical vs Quantum
Relativisitic).
• Radiaoctive Decay and characteristic of 𝛾 ray
spectrum.
 Objective and Apparatus
 Results and Discussion
• Gamma ray spectrum
• Energy calibration
• Compton Edge and Resolution
• Differential cross section.
 Conclusion and Outlook

Retrieved from: https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/433563/how-in-cesium-137-spectroscopy-barium-x-rays-being-detected

History 3

 Compton Scattering was first discovered by Arthur Compton in 1923,

 𝛾 radiation bounced off from the electron with a lower energy
(transfer of momentum; wave particle duality).
 The scattering cross section in the low energy regime can be
computed via the Thomson scattering formula discovered by J.J
Thomson in 1890s.
 In 1928, Oskar Klein and Yoshio Nishina managed to derive the Klein-
Nishina formula for calculating differential cross section by
accounting for relativisitic and quantum effects.
Fig 1: Image of Arthur
Compton

Retrieved from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Compton

Theory: Compton Scattering 4

𝐸
𝐸′ =
𝐸
1+ 2 (1 − 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝜃)
𝑚𝑒 𝑐
ℎ
For high energy photons, 𝐸 ′ ≈ 𝑚𝑒 𝑐 2 , 𝜆𝑓 ≈ 𝑚 𝑐 , where
𝑒
𝜆𝑓 ≫ 𝜆𝑖 . Thus, shift in wavelength and energy lost is
larger and hence, the scattered angle of the
Photon is close to 90˚.
Fig 2: Illustration of Compton Scattering.

Retrieved from: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/quantum/compeq.html

 Theory: Differential cross section 5

(Classical vs Quantum Relativistic)

Classical: Thomson’s formulae

𝑑𝜎 2
1 + cos 2 𝜃
= 𝑟𝑒 ; 𝑟𝑒 = 2.82 × 10−15 𝑚
𝑑Ω 2
(classical electron radius)

Quantum Electrodynamics: Klein-Nishina formulae

2
𝑑𝜎 𝑟𝑒2 𝐸 ′ 𝐸 𝐸′
= + − sin2 𝜃 ;
𝑑Ω 2 𝐸 𝐸′ 𝐸

Under the non-relativistic

𝐸 𝐸′
limit, as 𝑚𝑒 → ∞, ≈ ≈ 1 Klein-Nishina →Thomson.
𝐸′ 𝐸

Fig 3: Graph of differential cross section vs angles as we approach

the non relativistic limit.
Retrieved from: W. Greiner, Quantum Electrodynamics, 3rd Edition, pg 201.
 Theory: Radioactive Decay and 6
Characteristics of 𝛾 ray spectrum
• Energy of 𝛾 ray is unique to the element.

• 𝛾 rays from source pass through the NaI crystal,

doped with thallium, and the electrons gains energy.
Scintillations are formed as electrons in the crystal
``bounces” about until it loses its kinetic energy.
Fig 4: A schematic of decay schemes from 137
𝐶𝑠, 60𝐶𝑜 𝑎𝑛𝑑 22𝑁𝑎.
• Only photoelectric effect produces an output pulse
proportional to the photon’s energy.

• Pair production: E>1.022MeV, significant at 2.5MeV.

(Upon annihilation, pair of photon of 0.511MeV is
produced; full photopeak is only obtained by
absorbing the pair).

Retrieved from: NUS Laboratory Manual, ``Compton Scattering” (2018) revised Fig 5: An illustration of the various photon interactions that are
and https://radiologykey.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/c4-fig-0004.jpg Relevant at different incident photon energies.
 Theory: Radioactive Decay and 7
Characteristics of 𝛾 ray spectrum

 Three important feature of spectrum: The backscatter peak,

Compton edge and photopeak.
 The Compton plateau : Energy of the electron depends on
the scattering angles. Thus, there will be counts over a range
of channel number/ energy values.

Fig 6: Illustration of the graph of

 However, if the 𝛾 ray scatters backwards, the electron will counts vs energy with the various
receive most of the energy, but the probability is very small. characteristics of 𝛾 ray spectrum.
This leads to the Compton edge at the end of the plateau.

Retrieved from: https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/433563/how-in-cesium-137-spectroscopy-barium-x-rays-being-detected

Objective/ Impetus 8

 Determine the location of the photopeaks and Compton edge

(with and without lead block).
 Perform energy calibration and obtain experimental values for
photopeak energy of 60Co.
 Calculate resolution to determine performance of scintillation
counter.
 Investigate relationship between differential cross section of 127Cs
and various scattering angles (compare experiment and theory);
show validity of the Klein-Nishina formulae.
 Apparatus 9

 Setup; 3 main parts: Detector, amplifier

and computer (connected to analyser).

 Detector; 2 portion: Scintillation crystal (NaI),

photo-multiplier tube. Fig 7: Illustration of basic setup of the experiment using MCA4 software.

 High voltage set to 1000V, range preset set to 256.

 Low energy photon (visible) created by passing

Through scintillator. Photons then enter photomultiplier tube
→ current pulse.

Retrived from: NUS Laboratory Manual, ``Compton Scattering” (2018) revised and
https://scientificsentence.net/Equations/Nuclear_Physics/index.php?key=yes&Integer
=gamma_camera
Fig 8: Schematic of the interior of the photodetector.
 Results and Discussion (spectrum) 10

Photopeak (1)

Char x-ray
Back-scatter

Fig 9: Gamma ray spectrum of 137Cs source obtained over a period of

360s. Fig 10: Curve fit of phtopeak of 137Cs without lead.
Line in pink is curve fitting of Lorentzian function, the line
• Even though the convergence percentage computed by
in green is the curve fitting of Voigt function, while curve
Sigma-plot for the Lorentz 4 parameter function is 97.0% while in black is the spline trace of data points.
that of a 4 parameter Voigt function is only 52.5%, the
standard error estimate of Voigt is 2158.4759, lower than that of the Lorentzian plot, whose value is given by
8015.3503. Thus, the Voigt plot appears to be a better fit.
 11

Backscatter peak Backscatter peak

noise
Photopeaks (2)
Photopeaks (2)
noise
noise

Fig 11: Gamma ray spectrum of 22Na obtained over a period of 500s. Fig 12: Gamma ray spectrum of 60Co obtained over a period of 500s.

• Heights of photopeak are generally higher when lead block is positioned right next to the source. Lead
block acts as a background for photons emitted to be redirected more efficiently to the photodetector
and thus, the chances of photo-absorption increases by a small amount.
𝐹𝑊𝐻𝑀
• Resolution=𝑝𝑒𝑎𝑘 𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 × 100%, increase in height → reduce FWHM; enhance resolution.
• Peak position remains the same with or without lead, unique to individual nuclei.
 Results and Discussion (Energy Literature values
12
Calibration)

Fig 14: Table of literature energy values of the two sources and the
experimental values obtained from the energy calibration for 60Co with
their respective channel numbers.
• E=0.008018N-0.01885 ; 𝑅 2 =0.998889, 𝜎𝑐 =0.029925, 𝜎𝑚 = 0.000267 are
obtained. (Only 3 data points for calibration can be improved by
playing with more sources.)

Fig 13: Graph of energy (MeV) vs channel number.

• Compared to literature value, the percentage discrepancy of the
first and second peak of 60Co is given by 0.341% and 0.225%
respectively.
 Results and Discussion (Compton Edge 13
and Resolution)
• The Compton edge of 137Cs (only visible for
137Cs) appears on the channel number 53,
corresponding to the calibrated energy value of
(0.41 ± 0.05)MeV; differing from literature value of
0.478MeV by 14.2%.

• From figure 15, the resolution of all the peaks are

below 9%; NaI phototube combination is working
properly.

Fig 15: Table for the resolution of photopeaks for the three elements.

Retrieved from:http://gasp.lnl.infn.it/Description%26Results/Performances.html
 Results and Discussion (Differential 14
cross section)

Fig 16: Gamma ray spectrums of 137Cs from +15˚ to +105˚ Fig 17: Gamma ray spectrums of 137Cs from -15˚ to -105˚

• The 127Cs source is enclosed in a lead container with a small collimating slit which ensures that the 𝛾
particle are directed only at the aluminium rod; which acts as the scatterer.
• For each scattering angle θ, the gamma spectrum was collected over a period of 360s.
• The spectrum traced at 0˚ is ignored since the count is much higher and it undermines the readings at other angles.
 15

1 1
Fig 18: Graph of 1/E’ vs (1-cos𝜃) for 𝜃>0. • Figure 18 : 𝐸 =1.4766M𝑒𝑉 −1 , =1.9843M 𝑒𝑉 −1 , 𝑅2 =0.998.
𝑚𝑒 𝑐 2

1 1
• Figure 19: = 1.4401M 𝑒𝑉 −1 , 𝑚 2 =2.3084M 𝑒𝑉 −1 ,
𝐸 𝑒𝑐
𝑅2 =0.995.

• By taking average of the gradients and y-intercepts, the

experimental value of the rest mass energy of electron is
found to be (0.47 ± 0.05)𝑀𝑒𝑉 while that of the gamma ray
of 127Cs is given by 0.69 ± 0.03 𝑀𝑒𝑉.

• Percentage discrepancy for the rest mass energy of

electron is 8.02% and that of the gamma ray is 4.23%.
Fig 19: Graph of 1/E’ vs (1-cos 𝜃) for 𝜃<0.
 16
 The experimental curve is obtained
by using the energy calibration
relation and substitute into the Klein
Nishina formulae.
 If one uses the relation 𝐸 ′ =
𝐸
𝐸 by using the literature
1+ (1−𝑐𝑜𝑠𝜃)
𝑚𝑒 𝑐2
value of the energy of gamma ray of
137Cs ; 0.662MeV and the rest mass
of electron of 0.511MeV/c instead ,
the theoretical curve can be
acquired.
 Improve findings → take for a longer
period i.e. over 500s instead of 360s.
𝑑𝜎
Fig 20: Graph of differential cross section (bn) (1bn=10−28 𝑚2 ) vs scattering angle 𝜃 𝑜 .
𝑑Ω
Conclusion and Outlook 17

 We have demonstrated the accuracy of the theoretical model

(discrepancy of 𝑚𝑒 → 8.02%, discrepancy of 𝛾 → 4.23%).
 Experimental result does not deviate significantly from the
theoretical fit; symmetrical about 0𝑜 (affirming validity of Klein-
Nishina formulae).
 We can also confirm 𝐸𝑝ℎ𝑜𝑡𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑎𝑘 = 𝐸𝑏𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑠𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 + 𝐸𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑜𝑛 𝑒𝑑𝑔𝑒 .
 We can also compare the gamma ray spectrum between two
different background i.e. lead and aluminium.
References 18

 Schwartz , Mattew (2017), ``Quantum Field Theory and The Standard

Model.”, Cambridge University Press.
 W. Greiner, J. Reinhardt (2003), ``Quantum Electrodynamcis, 3rd
Edition”, Springer.
 Shanni R. P, David (2012), `` Exploring Compton scattering using the
spectrum techniques UC-20 universal computer spectrometer”,
[laboratory manual], http://www.diy-Physics.com.
 Department of Physics (2018) revised, ``Compton scattering”
[laboratory manual], National University of Singapore.