Finite-band Cherenkov yield model

Choose an original transparent-band model, defined only for $400\le \lambda \le 700\mathrm{nm}$:This chosen refractive index is not a fit to water, glass or the historical liquids. It decreases from $1.3425$ to approximately $1.300408$, so the threshold $1/n$ increases across the band. For $\beta =0.75$, solving $n({\lambda }_{\ast })=1/\beta$ givesOnly $400\le \lambda <{\lambda }_{\ast }$ emits. Faster particles with $\beta =0.78$ and $0.90$ emit throughout this chosen band. The Cherenkov cone angle and the Frank-Tamm formula are both evaluated with the same $n(\lambda )$.

For a $1\mathrm{cm}$ track the chosen model predicts about $0.589$, $27.40$ and $142.85$ emitted photons for $\beta =0.75$, $0.78$ and $0.90$, respectively. An expected count below one is meaningful over repeated equivalent tracks; it is not a fractional photon observed on one track. The near-threshold example illustrates why extending a constant-index approximation across an entire optical band can give the wrong emitting interval.

Finite bandwidth is essential. The $1/{\lambda }^2$ factor cannot be extrapolated down to arbitrarily small wavelength: the chosen material model stops at its stated band. Real optical dispersion changes the threshold and direction, and appreciable absorption requires a complex material response beyond the simple transparent-medium expression. A detected count must also include transport, collection geometry and the detector's wavelength-dependent response. Even a correct produced spectrum therefore does not, on its own, predict perceived colour or observed glow intensity.