So the Wood-Saxon density distribution for protons in a nucleus is given as follows: $$\rho_p(r) = \frac{\rho_{p0}}{1+e^{[(r-R_0)/a]}}$$

Here $r$ is the distance to the centre of the nucleus, and $a$ is the so called skin depth. $\rho_{p0}$ is a constant such that the integral of the distribution equals the number of protons in the nucleus.

Now in a recent exam, the following question was asked:

"In the Woods-Saxon formula, $a$ is the measure of the width of the edge region of the nucleus (also denoted as the “skin depth”). The density at the edge is decreased to 20% of the density in the centre of the nucleus at a radius $R_{20}$ and to 80% of the density at a radius $R_{80}$. What is the distance between $R_{20}$ and $R_{80}$ expressed in units of $a$?"

Now I plugged in the following in Mathematica, $\rho_p(0)=x\rho_p(r)$, where $x$ denotes the percentage. After solving this for $r$ and subtracting $r$ for $x=0.20$ and $x=0.80$, I came up with the following final answer: $$a \ln\left(0.0625 + \frac{1}{5.333... + 4.266.... \exp{R_0/a}}\right).$$

However the final answer given in the exam was $a \ln(0.0625)$. What am I missing here?

  • Is $R_0>>a$ in general?
  • Was the professor wrong?
  • Something else?

closed as off-topic by Yashas, Jon Custer, ZeroTheHero, John Rennie, glS Apr 28 '17 at 8:37

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "Homework-like questions should ask about a specific physics concept and show some effort to work through the problem. We want our questions to be useful to the broader community, and to future users. See our meta site for more guidance on how to edit your question to make it better" – Yashas, Jon Custer, ZeroTheHero, John Rennie, glS
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Is general $R_0 \gt \gt a$? - yep $R_0$ describes the nuclear radius and $a$ describes the width of the fall of region. In most cases nuclei are pretty much spherical hence to a good approximation $R_0 \gt \gt a$ in most cases. $\endgroup$ – Quantum spaghettification Apr 20 '17 at 11:57
  • Is $a \ll R_0$ in general? Most of the time, yes (it is not true near drip lines). By the way, if you consider symmetric nuclei only so you have $$\rho(r) = \rho_0 \left[1+\exp\left(\frac{r-R_0}{a}\right)\right]^{-1}$$ you can do a Sommerfeld expansion to recover $A$ (number of nucleons).

  • Was the professor wrong? No, he was right! Indeed, you are looking for the expression of $\Delta R = R_{80}-R_{20}$, let us express $R_{x}$ where $x$ denotes the percentage.

$$x \rho_{p_0} = \rho_{p_0} \left[1+\exp\left(\frac{R_x-R_0}{a}\right)\right]^{-1}$$

$$x = \frac{1}{1+\exp\left(\frac{R_x-R}{a}\right)}$$

$$1+\exp\left(\frac{R_x-R}{a}\right) = \frac{1}{x}$$

$$\exp(R_x - R_0)/a = 1/x - 1$$

$$R_x = a \ln(1/x - 1) + R_0$$

Finally we have

$$\Delta R = a\left[\ln(1/0.8 -1) +R_0 - \ln(1/0.2 - 1) - R_0\right]$$

Knowing that $\ln(a) - \ln(b) = \ln\left(\frac{a}{b}\right)$, we recover the expression of your professor:

$$\Delta R = a\ln\left(\frac{1/0.8-1}{1/0.2-1}\right) = a\ln(0.0625)$$

  • Something else? $a$ is often called the diffuseness parameter.
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, this explains a lot! In your calculation of $R_x$, you made use of the assumption $a<<R_0$ as well right? Otherwise there would still be a dependence on $R_0$., if I'm not mistaken. $\endgroup$ – Ralf Mackenbach Apr 20 '17 at 15:22
  • $\begingroup$ No, i don't use this assumption. The $R_0$ dependence disappears when you calculate the difference. I edited my answer to give you more details. You can valid my answer if it satisfies you. $\endgroup$ – T. Auerrac Apr 20 '17 at 15:41
  • $\begingroup$ I totally agree on the algebra, the only point I'm stuck on is definitions. $R_x$ is defined as the distance where $\rho_p$ has decreased to $x$ percent of it's value at the centre. You take the value at the centre to be $\rho_{p0}$, and I take it to be $\rho_p(o) = \rho_{p0} / [1 + \exp[...]]$. Hence my confusion. The only way I can reconcile this is by assuming $a<<R_0$. $\endgroup$ – Ralf Mackenbach Apr 20 '17 at 15:41
  • $\begingroup$ Consider this picture : Wood-Saxon density profiles. When you take $80\%$ of the density profile at the center, you get $0.8\rho_{p_0}$, simplifying with the other side of the equation. $\endgroup$ – T. Auerrac Apr 20 '17 at 16:05
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks! But this doesn't hold for low A nucleons right? Like in this plot (I took these of the Nuclear Charge Density Archives) $\endgroup$ – Ralf Mackenbach Apr 20 '17 at 16:16

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.