Copper K alpha lines, ionization potential, confused

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the confusion regarding the energy of X-rays produced during the photoelectric effect when copper K alpha 1 emission interacts with aluminum foil. The energy of the emitted X-ray is stated as 8047 eV (8.047 KeV), which corresponds to the binding energy difference of copper, not aluminum. This raises questions about the relevance of the binding energy of the incident material versus the target material in the photoelectric effect process. The participant seeks clarification on why the binding energy of copper is referenced instead of that of aluminum.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the photoelectric effect
  • Familiarity with X-ray emission processes
  • Knowledge of binding energy concepts
  • Basic principles of quantum physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the photoelectric effect in detail
  • Study the properties of copper K alpha X-ray emissions
  • Examine the binding energy differences in various elements
  • Explore quantum physics textbooks that cover X-ray interactions
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for physics students, quantum mechanics enthusiasts, and professionals in materials science who are exploring the interactions of X-rays with different materials.

Jack Penny
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I'm a computer scientist who was recently given a book about quantum physics. I am confused about something in the book. Imagine shining an x-ray (produced by copper K alpha 1 emission) on an aluminium foil. I understand the basics of photoelectric effect. You shine the x-ray on target aluminium atoms, the K-atom is ejected, creating a hole, and then an L-atom drops down and in the process an X-ray is produced. In the book, the energy of the X-ray (produced when the electron from L-shell drops down and occupies the hole) is given as 8047 eV (8.047 KeV). What I don't understand is, this is the difference in the binding energy of COPPER. But the ejected electron is ejected from the ALUMINIUM foil. Surely the difference in binding energy should be the one in the aluminium foil, not the difference in the incident X-ray?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Which book? Without context it is impossible to answer that question.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
937