
Advanced Quantum Mechanics course sequence · Interactive lesson
The exact Coulomb amplitude in parabolic coordinates
Coulomb scattering is the one collision you can solve exactly, and the one your partial-wave toolkit cannot touch: the 1/r tail never lets the wave go free. Parabolic coordinates hand over the whole solution, and with it the phase that Rutherford's formula hides and every interference experiment sees.
UAQM-02.07 · Lesson 7 of 9 in this unit. Position is not a completion score.Build the model
Rutherford's modulus at every energy, and a phase only the exact solution knows.
The key idea
The exact Coulomb amplitude fC(θ) is the coefficient of the outgoing wave in the exact Schrödinger solution for two point charges: its modulus is Rutherford's at every energy, and its phase, −η ln sin²(θ/2) + 2σ₀, is what perturbation theory misses.
Example. For 5.0 MeV α particles on gold, η = 22.3 and |fC(90°)| = 23.2 fm, so dσ/dΩ = 5.39 b sr⁻¹, Rutherford's number exactly, while the phase of fC at 30° exceeds its phase at 90° by 44.7 rad.
The complete physical model and assumptions
Quantum Mechanics II's scattering theory rests on an assumption it rarely states: far from the target the wave is free. A potential falling as 1/r never lets go. Energy conservation makes the local wavenumber k − η/r, and its integral leaves a phase −η ln r that keeps growing at every distance, so no plane wave, no spherical wave and no phase shift measured against them ever appears. The cure is to solve exactly. The Coulomb problem separates in parabolic coordinates, a gift of the hidden symmetry that conserves the Runge–Lenz vector: writing ψ = e(ikz) w(r − z) turns the Schrödinger equation into Kummer's equation, its solution regular on the forward axis is M(−iη, 1, ik(r − z)), and the quoted large-argument form of M splits ψ into a distorted incident wave and a distorted outgoing one whose coefficient is fC. The result teaches what a cross-section can and cannot see. |fC|² is Rutherford's formula exactly, with no ħ in it, at every energy; the phase −η ln sin²(θ/2) + 2σ₀ is invisible alone and decisive whenever fC is added to another amplitude, for identical nuclei or a short-range nuclear force. The model stops where its assumptions do: atomic electrons screen the tail, nuclear forces act once the charges touch, and spin and relativity add the Mott factor of Unit 5.
1A tail that never lets the wave go free
Units are SI, with α = e²/(4πε₀ħc) ≈ 1/137.036; nothing here is relativistic, so no metric signature enters. Quantum Mechanics II's partial waves assume V falls faster than 1/r, so that far out each wave is free and carries a fixed phase shift. Coulomb's tail breaks that. Energy conservation gives the local wavenumber k(r) = √(k² − 2ηk/r) ≈ k − η/r, with η = Z₁Z₂e²/(4πε₀ħv), so the accumulated phase ∫k(r) dr = kr − η ln r + constant drifts at every distance (derived). No Coulomb wave ever becomes free, no phase shift can be measured against a free one, and the problem has to be solved exactly. η also says how classical the collision is: η/k = Z₁Z₂e²/(4πε₀μv²) is half the head-on turning distance, so η counts reduced wavelengths across it. A 5.0 MeV α on gold has η = 22.3 and η/k = 23.2 fm, a classical orbit; a 3.0 MeV proton on a proton at rest has η = 0.091, nearly Born.
2Parabolic coordinates turn the PDE into Kummer's equation
Write the Schrödinger equation as (∇² + k² − 2ηk/r)ψ = 0 with k = μv/ħ. The beam picks out z, and the scattered wave depends on r − z = 2r sin²(θ/2), so try ψ = e(ikz) w(u) with u = r − z. Three facts do the work: |∇u|² = 2u/r, ∇²u = 2/r and ∂u/∂z = −u/r. Then ∇²ψ = e(ikz)[(2u/r)w″ + (2/r)w′ − (2iku/r)w′ − k²w], the k² cancels, and multiplying by r/2 leaves u w″ + (1 − iku)w′ − ηk w = 0. With x = iku this is Kummer's equation x w″ + (b − x)w′ − a w = 0 with a = −iη, b = 1. One solution is M(−iη, 1, x) = Σ (−iη)ₙ xⁿ/(n!)², finite at x = 0; the other carries ln x. Since u = 0 along the whole forward half-axis, not just at the origin, ln x would make ψ singular on a line, so only M survives. All of this is derived; that the equation separates at all reflects the Coulomb problem's extra symmetry, the one that conserves the Runge–Lenz vector.
3The quoted asymptotics hand over fC
Set ψ = N e(ikz) M(−iη, 1, ik(r − z)). The large-|x| form of M is quoted from hydrogen's radial problem: M(a, b, x) ≈ Γ(b)(−x)(−a)/Γ(b − a) + Γ(b)eˣ x(a − b)/Γ(a). With x = iku and principal branches, the first term is e(πη/2) e(iη ln ku)/Γ(1 + iη) and the second is −i e(πη/2) e(iku) e(−iη ln ku)/[ku Γ(−iη)]. Choosing N = Γ(1 + iη) e(−πη/2) gives the incident wave unit amplitude: exp[i(kz + η ln k(r − z))]. Because Γ(1 − iη) = −iη Γ(−iη), the ratio −iΓ(1 + iη)/Γ(−iη) collapses to −η Γ(1 + iη)/Γ(1 − iη) = −η e(2iσ₀). With e(ikz) e(iku) = e(ikr) and k(r − z) = 2kr sin²(θ/2), the second term becomes fC(θ) exp[i(kr − η ln 2kr)]/r, and fC is the card's formula: derived here, from asymptotics that are quoted.
4Rutherford's modulus, but not Born's phase
|fC|² = (η/2k)²/sin⁴(θ/2) = (Z₁Z₂e²/(16πε₀E))²/sin⁴(θ/2). ħ has cancelled, so the exact quantum answer equals the classical orbit calculation and Quantum Mechanics II's first Born result at every energy. Dimensions check: η/k is a length, so dσ/dΩ is in m² sr⁻¹. The coincidence belongs to 1/r alone; a screened potential's Born cross-section depends on ħ through k times the screening length. The amplitude is another matter: fC = fB e(iΦ), with fB = −η/(2k sin²(θ/2)) (quoted from Quantum Mechanics II) and Φ = 2σ₀ − η ln sin²(θ/2). As η → 0, σ₀ ≈ −γη with γ = 0.5772 (quoted), so Φ → 0 and Born returns: the weak-coupling limit. For 5.0 MeV α on gold, |fC(90°)| = 23.2 fm and dσ/dΩ = 5.39 b sr⁻¹. Geiger and Marsden's 1913 counts on gold followed 1/sin⁴(θ/2) from 15° to 150°, over which that factor falls 3000-fold: a measured check of the modulus, and blind to the phase.
5The phase is seen only when amplitudes meet
Far away, ψ = exp[i(kz + η ln k(r − z))] + fC exp[i(kr − η ln 2kr)]/r, and neither piece is ever free. The log phases leave the counts alone: their gradient is η/r, so the radial current (ħ/μ)|fC|²(k − η/r)/r² differs from the free value by η/(kr), 2 × 10⁻¹³ for the 5.0 MeV α on gold at 10 cm. They do bound the result. The split needs k(r − z) ≫ 1 + η², which fails in a narrowing cone around the forward direction at any r; there fC diverges, the total cross-section is infinite, and pure Coulomb scattering has no optical theorem. And the phase becomes physics once fC is added to another amplitude. For identical nuclei fC(θ) meets fC(π − θ), and the two phases differ by η ln tan²(θ/2): Mott's oscillations, the next lesson. With a nuclear force the short-range wave arrives as (1/k) e(2iσ₀) e(iδ₀) sin δ₀ (quoted); σ₀ cancels in the interference but −η ln sin²(θ/2) does not, which the figure shows.
6Where point charges stop being enough
Atomic electrons screen the nucleus beyond about the Thomas–Fermi radius aTF ≈ 0.885a₀Z(−1/3) (quoted), 1.1 × 10⁴ fm for gold. Outside it the potential falls faster than 1/r, the log phase stops growing and the forward amplitude turns finite; classically only impact parameters (η/k)cot(θ/2) beyond aTF are touched, angles below 0.24° for 5.0 MeV α on gold. Nuclear forces need contact. The classical closest approach at angle θ is (η/k)[1 + 1/sin(θ/2)], 46 fm at 180° for that α against about 9 fm for touching nuclei. The exact solution says how rarely the charges meet: N gives |ψ(0)|² = |Γ(1 + iη)|² e(−πη) = 2πη/(e(2πη) − 1), using |Γ(1 + iη)|² = πη/sinh(πη) (quoted). That is 2.5 × 10⁻⁵⁹ for η = 22.26, the unrounded value for this α. At large η it falls as 2πη e(−2πη), whose exponential is the Gamow factor divided out of measured fusion cross-sections to define the astrophysical S-factor; as η → 0 it tends to 1. Spin and relativity, absent here, bring the Mott factor in Unit 5.
Key equations
Read the units, assumptions and limits before substituting.
Sommerfeld parameter
η = Z₁Z₂e²/(4πε₀ħv) = Z₁Z₂αc/v
η/k is half the head-on turning distance, so η counts reduced wavelengths across it: η ≫ 1 is the classical regime, η ≪ 1 the Born regime.
v the relative speed (m s⁻¹), α = e²/(4πε₀ħc) ≈ 1/137.036; η is dimensionless and positive for repulsionParabolic reduction to Kummer's equation
ψ = e(ikz) w(u), u = r − z ⇒ x w″ + (1 − x) w′ + iη w = 0, x = iku
Derived here. One ordinary equation replaces the PDE, and its solution regular on the whole forward axis is M(−iη, 1, ik(r − z)).
k = μv/ħ (m⁻¹), μ the reduced mass (kg), u = r − z = 2r sin²(θ/2) (m); x is dimensionlessExact Coulomb amplitude
fC(θ) = −[η/(2k sin²(θ/2))] exp[−iη ln sin²(θ/2) + 2iσ₀]
Derived from the quoted large-argument form of M. The minus sign is repulsion; the exponential is everything the Born amplitude lacks.
fC in m; θ the c.m. angle; σ₀ = arg Γ(1 + iη), the s-wave Coulomb phase, in radIts modulus: Rutherford at every η
dσ/dΩ = |fC|² = (Z₁Z₂e²/(16πε₀E))² / sin⁴(θ/2)
Classical orbits, first Born and the exact solution all give this, a property of 1/r alone; what they disagree on is the phase.
E = μv²/2, the c.m. kinetic energy (J); dσ/dΩ in m² sr⁻¹; ħ has cancelledAsymptotic wave, distorted at every r
ψ → exp[i(kz + η ln k(r − z))] + fC(θ) exp[i(kr − η ln 2kr)]/r
Their gradient is only η/r, so the outgoing current per steradian is still |fC|² times the incident flux, to order η/(kr).
for unit incident amplitude, valid where k(r − z) ≫ 1 + η²; the log phases are in rad and never die awayDensity at the origin (Sommerfeld factor)
|ψ(0)|² = |Γ(1 + iη)|² e(−πη) = 2πη/(e(2πη) − 1)
Tends to 1 as η → 0 and to 2πη e(−2πη) for η ≫ 1, whose exponential is the Gamow factor; it exceeds 1 for attraction, η negative.
dimensionless, per unit incident density; uses |Γ(1 + iη)|² = πη/sinh(πη), quotedInteractive lab
Predict first. Explore the model. Compare the result.
Explore the model
Try this. At η = 1.5, δ₀ = 20°, θ = 60° the exact ratio is 1.05 and the phase-deleted one 0.80. Raise η and the solid curve swings through more oscillations while the dashed one only flattens; at 180° the two always meet, since ln sin²90° = 0. Set δ₀ = 0 and both lie on 1.
Live results
- LOG PHASE AT θ
- 2.08 rad
- RATIO, EXACT fC
- 1.049
- RATIO, LOG PHASE DELETED
- 0.799
- |fN| ÷ |fC| AT θ
- 0.114
Results follow this lesson’s model and assumptions. Displayed values are rounded.
Predict → change one variable → check
Plan a change before running it. Every other input stays at the saved baseline.
Saved baseline. Sommerfeld parameter η: 1.5; Nuclear s-wave shift δ₀: 20 °; Marker angle θ: 60 °
This experiment is kept only while this page is open. It does not change saved course progress.
Catch the common trap
Because |fC|² is the Rutherford formula Quantum Mechanics II reached in first Born approximation, it is tempting to conclude that the Born approximation is exact for the Coulomb potential and to use fB = −η/(2k sin²(θ/2)) wherever an amplitude is needed. Only the modulus is exact. The Born series does not even converge to fC term by term: its second term diverges logarithmically as the screening is removed, because the Coulomb phase surfaces order by order, a constant that grows as the logarithm of the screening length plus the finite −η ln sin²(θ/2) + 2σ₀. The error is invisible in a single amplitude's cross-section and decisive the moment two amplitudes add. For identical particles the phase of fC(θ) relative to fC(π − θ) is −η ln tan²(θ/2), which a Born amplitude sets to zero, erasing the oscillations Mott's formula predicts and experiments record.
Practice & worked examples
3 authored examples. Make an attempt, then reveal the reasoning one step at a time.
EasyExample 1
A 4.0 MeV proton beam (lab) strikes a thin silver foil (Z = 47, mass 107.87 u). Treating both as point charges and working non-relativistically, find η, |fC| and dσ/dΩ at a c.m. angle of 60°, and the phase of fC at 60° relative to its phase at 120°.
Sketch your answer or reasoning, then compare it with the authored solution. Your writing is not automatically graded or saved.
0 of 5 steps revealed.
- Speed: v/c = √(2T/(mₚ c²)) = √(8.0/938.27) = 0.09234, so η = Z₁Z₂/(137.036 × 0.09234) = 47/12.654 = 3.71. Several reduced wavelengths fit in the turning distance: a semiclassical collision.
- The target recoils, so use the c.m. energy: E = 4.0 MeV × 107.87/(107.87 + 1.007) = 3.963 MeV. Then η/k = Z₁Z₂e²/(4πε₀ × 2E) = 47 × 1.440 MeV fm/(2 × 3.963 MeV) = 8.54 fm.
- |fC(60°)| = (η/k)/(2 sin²30°) = 8.54 fm/0.500 = 17.1 fm, so dσ/dΩ = |fC|² = 292 fm² sr⁻¹ = 2.92 b sr⁻¹. ħ never entered: this is Rutherford's number.
- The factor e(2iσ₀) is common to every angle, so the relative phase is the logarithmic part alone: −η ln[sin²30°/sin²60°] = 3.714 × ln 3 = 3.714 × 1.0986 = 4.08 rad.
- Checks: η/k is a length, so dσ/dΩ comes out in m² sr⁻¹; and as η → 0 the relative phase vanishes, returning the real Born amplitude.
Answer. η = 3.71; |fC(60°)| = 17.1 fm and dσ/dΩ = 2.92 b sr⁻¹ (2.92 × 10⁻²⁸ m² sr⁻¹); the phase of fC at 60° exceeds that at 120° by 4.08 rad.
MediumExample 2
A 2.0 MeV α beam (lab) scatters from aluminium (Z = 13, 26.98 u). A detector at θ = 40° sits 25 cm from the foil. Find η and k, the phase by which the scattered wave at the detector lags a free outgoing wave, how much that lag grows when the detector moves to 50 cm, and whether the move changes the counts per steradian.
Sketch your answer or reasoning, then compare it with the authored solution. Your writing is not automatically graded or saved.
0 of 5 steps revealed.
- Non-relativistically v/c = √(2T/(mα c²)) = √(4.0/3727.4) = 0.03276, so η = 2 × 13/(137.036 × 0.03276) = 5.79. With 26.98 u × 931.49 MeV u⁻¹ = 25132 MeV for aluminium, the reduced mass is μc² = 3727.4 × 25132/(3727.4 + 25132) MeV = 3246 MeV, so ħck = μc²(v/c) = 106.3 MeV and k = 106.3/197.33 fm⁻¹ = 0.539 fm⁻¹ = 5.39 × 10¹⁴ m⁻¹.
- The scattered wave is fC exp[i(kr − η ln 2kr)]/r, so it lags the free outgoing wave fC e(ikr)/r by η ln 2kr. At 25 cm, 2kr = 2.69 × 10¹⁴ and ln 2kr = 33.23, so the lag is 5.79 × 33.23 = 192 rad, about 31 cycles.
- At 50 cm the lag is larger by η ln 2 = 5.79 × 0.693 = 4.01 rad, reaching 196 rad: the distortion never settles, however far away the detector is.
- The local radial wavenumber is d(kr − η ln 2kr)/dr = k − η/r, so the radial current differs from the free one by the fraction η/(kr) = 5.79/(5.39 × 10¹⁴ m⁻¹ × 0.25 m) = 4.3 × 10⁻¹⁴, and half that at 50 cm. The counts per steradian are |fC|² times the incident flux at both distances.
- Checks: energy conservation gives v(r)/v = √(1 − 2η/(kr)) ≈ 1 − η/(kr), the same fraction, so the log phase is the integrated memory of the Coulomb slowing. The asymptotic form holds: k(r − z) = 2kr sin²20° = 3.2 × 10¹³ ≫ 1 + η² = 34.5.
Answer. η = 5.79 and k = 5.39 × 10¹⁴ m⁻¹; the lag is 192 rad at 25 cm and 196 rad at 50 cm (4.01 rad more), yet the current changes only by η/(kr) ≈ 4 × 10⁻¹⁴, so the counts per steradian are unchanged.
HardExample 3
In a repulsive collision with η = 1.5 a short-range force adds an s-wave with Coulomb-modified phase shift δ₀ = 20°, all other nuclear shifts being zero, so f = fC + (1/k) e(2iσ₀) e(iδ₀) sin δ₀ (form quoted). Find dσ/dΩ divided by Rutherford's at 180° and 60°, then at 60° again with the logarithmic phase of fC deleted, and say what the comparison shows.
Sketch your answer or reasoning, then compare it with the authored solution. Your writing is not automatically graded or saved.
0 of 6 steps revealed.
- Call the nuclear term fN and divide it by the derived fC: fN/fC = −(2 sin²(θ/2) sin δ₀/η) exp[i(δ₀ + η ln sin²(θ/2))]. The factor e(2iσ₀) cancels; the log phase does not.
- Write a = 2 sin²(θ/2) sin δ₀/η and χ = δ₀ + η ln sin²(θ/2). The ratio to Rutherford is R = |1 + fN/fC|² = 1 − 2a cos χ + a².
- At 180°: sin²90° = 1, so a = 2 × 0.3420/1.5 = 0.4560 and χ = δ₀ = 0.3491 rad with cos χ = 0.9397. R = 1 − 0.8571 + 0.2080 = 0.351.
- At 60°: a = 0.1140, η ln sin²30° = 1.5 × (−1.3863) = −2.0794, so χ = −1.7304 rad and cos χ = −0.1589. R = 1 + 0.0362 + 0.0130 = 1.049.
- Delete the log phase and χ = δ₀ at every angle: R(60°) = 1 − 2 × 0.1140 × 0.9397 + 0.0130 = 0.799. At 180° nothing changes, because ln sin²90° = 0.
- Checks: R is a ratio of two cross-sections, dimensionless; δ₀ → 0 gives R = 1, pure Rutherford. The exact amplitude puts 60° 5% above Rutherford, the phase-deleted one 20% below, a 31% difference that a measurement can settle.
Answer. R(180°) = 0.351 either way; at 60°, R = 1.05 with the exact fC against 0.80 with its logarithmic phase deleted, so the interference measures the phase that |fC|² alone cannot.
Quick check
Select an answer and explain it before checking.
Review & continue
The exact Coulomb amplitude fC(θ) is the coefficient of the outgoing wave in the exact Schrödinger solution for two point charges: its modulus is Rutherford's at every energy, and its phase, −η ln sin²(θ/2) + 2σ₀, is what perturbation theory misses.
- Explain the relationship without looking at the equation.
- Check a sign, a unit and a model assumption in your working.
- Return to the lab or worked example if a step is still unclear.