Reflecting Materials
| Material: | VF | vC | η (10−4) |
| Beryllium | 252 neV | 6.89 m/s | 2.0-8.5 |
| BeO | 261 neV | 6.99 m/s | |
| Nickel | 252 neV | 6.84 m/s | 5.1 |
| Diamond | 304 neV | 7.65 m/s | |
| Graphite | 180 neV | 5.47 m/s | |
| Iron | 210 neV | 6.10 m/s | 1.7-28 |
| Copper | 168 neV | 5.66 m/s | 2.1-16 |
| Aluminium | 54 neV | 3.24 m/s | 2.9-10 |
Any material with a positive neutron optical potential can reflect UCN. The table on the right gives an (incomplete) list of UCN reflecting materials including the height of the neutron optical potential (VF) and the corresponding critical velocity (vC). The height of the neutron optical potential is isotope-specific. The highest known value of VF is measured for 58Ni: 335 neV (vC=8.14 m/s). It defines the upper limit of the kinetic energy range of UCN.
The most widely used materials for UCN wall coatings are Beryllium, Beryllium oxide, Nickel (including 58Ni) and more recently also diamond-like carbon (DLC).
Non-magnetic materials such as DLC are usually preferred for the use with polarized neutrons. Magnetic centers in e.g. Ni can lead to de-polarization of such neutrons upon reflection. If a material is magnetized, the neutron optical potential is different for the two polarizations, caused by
where is the magnetic moment of the neutron and the magnetic field created on the surface by the magnetization.
Each material has a specific loss probability per reflection,
which depends on the kinetic energy of the incident UCN (E) and the angle of incidence (θ). It is caused by absorption and thermal upscattering. The loss coefficient η is energy-independent and typically of the order of 10−4 to 10−3.
Read more about this topic: Ultracold Neutrons
Famous quotes containing the words reflecting and/or materials:
“The mention of one apartment in a building naturally introduces an enquiry or discourse concerning the others: and if we think of a wound, we can scarcely forbear reflecting on the pain which follows it.”
—David Hume (1711–1776)
“If our entertainment culture seems debased and unsatisfying, the hope is that our children will create something of greater worth. But it is as if we expect them to create out of nothing, like God, for the encouragement of creativity is in the popular mind, opposed to instruction. There is little sense that creativity must grow out of tradition, even when it is critical of that tradition, and children are scarcely being given the materials on which their creativity could work”
—C. John Sommerville (20th century)