Calculating Energy of Photoelectrons Ejected from a Magnesium Surface

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on calculating the energy of photoelectrons ejected from a magnesium surface with a work function of 3.68 eV when exposed to electromagnetic waves of 215 nm wavelength. The initial calculations yielded an energy of 3.29x10-19 J and 2.03 eV, which were incorrect due to rounding errors. The correct energy values are 3.35x10-19 J and 2.09 eV. Participants suggest performing calculations without substituting numbers until the final step to improve accuracy.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the photoelectric effect
  • Familiarity with the work function concept
  • Knowledge of Planck's constant (h = 6.63x10-34 J.s)
  • Basic proficiency in unit conversions between electron volts and joules
NEXT STEPS
  • Learn about the photoelectric effect and its applications in modern physics
  • Study the implications of work function in different materials
  • Explore advanced calculations involving Planck's equation and energy quantization
  • Investigate the impact of wavelength on photoelectron energy
USEFUL FOR

Students in physics, educators teaching the photoelectric effect, and researchers interested in quantum mechanics and material science.

euphoriax
Messages
12
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A magnesium surface has a work function of 3.68 eV. Electromagnetic waves with a 215 nm wavelength strikes the surface and eject photoelectrons. Calculate the energy of the photoelectrons in Joules and in electron volts.

W= 3.68 eV = 5.96x10-19 J
wavelength= 215 nm = 2.15x10-7 m
E=?
h= 6.63x10-34 J.s
c= 3.00x108 m/s
melectron= 9.1x10-31 kg

Homework Equations



v=f(wavelength)
E=hf-W


The Attempt at a Solution



v= f(wavelength)
f= v/wavelength
f= (3.0x108 m/s)
f= 1.39x1015 hz

E= hf-W
= (6.63x10-34 J.s) (1.39x1015 Hz) - 5.96x10-19 J)
E=3.29x10-19 J
E= 2.03 eV

The answer that I got is wrong. The real answer is supposed to be 3.35x10-19 J, and 2.09 eV. Does anyone know where I went wrong? If you do, I would appreciate if you could explain it too
Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are doing it right, you are just getting rounding errors I believe.

Try writing it all out into one big equation. without substituting any numbers. Then just put all of the numbers in at the same time for one calculation at the end, this will be more accurate.
I just did it the same way you did and got 2.09eV
 
Oh, that's true.
thank you!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
9K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K