X-Ray Production in Beiser's Physics Textbook: Typo or Not?

  • Thread starter Thread starter asdf1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    X-ray
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the formula for x-ray production as presented in Arthur Beiser's modern physics textbook. Participants are questioning the units associated with the term "nambdamin" and whether it is a typographical error, particularly regarding its relationship to voltage.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are exploring the meaning of "nambdamin" and whether it should be "lambda." There is confusion regarding the units of x-ray production and the distinction between voltage as a variable and volts as a unit. Some participants are attempting to clarify the relationship between energy, voltage, and wavelength in the context of x-ray production.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with some participants providing insights into the relationship between the variables and units involved. There is a mix of interpretations regarding the formula, and while some guidance has been offered, no consensus has been reached on the initial question of whether there is a typo.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of the textbook's presentation and are trying to reconcile their understanding of the physics concepts involved, particularly regarding the minimum wavelength of x-rays and the associated units.

asdf1
Messages
734
Reaction score
0
in my modern physics textbook 6/E by arthur beiser,
the formula for x-ray production is written as
(namdamin)=1.24*10^(-6)/V V*m
is that a typo? how can namda have units of V*m?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Perhaps it would help if you explained exactly what you are talking about!

As far as I know "x-ray production" doesn't have units! What exactly does
"nambdamin" mean? (Was that supposed to be "lambda"?) Oh, and what is V? volts?
 
x-ray production doesn't have units?
jeepers~
i must be misunderstanding modern physics...
:P
i don't know how to type the symbols, but yes, "nambda min" means the "lambda" minimun...
V stands for volts...
 
the second V (that's multiplied by meters) is a UNIT, Volts.
But the first V (that you divide by) is a VARIABLE ... Voltage.

These are NOT the same thing, but the units cancel.

"the lamda minimum ..."
lamda of WHAT? V of WHAT?
 
asdf1 said:
in my modern physics textbook 6/E by arthur beiser,
the formula for x-ray production is written as
(namdamin)=1.24*10^(-6)/V V*m
is that a typo? how can namda have units of V*m?
You are talking about the minimum wavength of x-rays produced by accelerating electrons through a voltage V and slamming them against a target. Naturally, the maximum energy of an x-ray will be the final KE of the electron before it hits the target.

That gives

[tex]KE(electron) = e*V = \frac{hc}{\lambda_{min}}[/tex]
[tex]\implies~ \lambda_{min} = \frac{hc}{eV} = \frac {hc}{e} \cdot \frac{1}{V}[/tex]

The quantity [itex]hc/e[/itex] has a value of [itex]1.24 *10^{-6}~Vm[/itex]

When you divide by the units of the applied voltage V (ie: volts), you are left with units of meters, the correct unit for a wavelength !
 
Last edited:
thank you very much! :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K