Determining e/m of electron lab

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Aziza
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Electron Lab
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the determination of the charge to mass ratio (e/m) of electrons in a laboratory experiment involving an electron beam subjected to a magnetic field. Participants explore the implications of velocity assumptions, measurement techniques, and theoretical versus measured values in the context of the experiment.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that the lab manual states the measured e/m will be higher than theoretical due to lower-than-expected electron velocities caused by collisions with helium atoms.
  • Another participant argues that the assumption of uniform velocity leads to a discrepancy, suggesting that the theoretical e/m is calculated using a true average velocity that is lower than the assumed initial velocity used in the measurement.
  • A participant expresses confusion over the implications of velocity on the e/m ratio, questioning the relationship between measured and theoretical values.
  • Some participants propose that the statement about electron velocity being lower than theoretical indicates an overestimation of velocity, leading to a higher measured e/m.
  • Another participant clarifies that the measurement focuses on the radius of curvature of the beam, suggesting that a decrease in electron velocity results in an increased radius, which is not accounted for in the lab's calculations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing interpretations of how velocity affects the measured and theoretical e/m values, with no consensus reached on the correct relationship between these quantities.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential limitations in the assumptions made regarding electron velocity and its impact on the calculations of e/m, as well as the effects of energy loss during the experiment.

Aziza
Messages
189
Reaction score
1
In our lab we determined the charge to mass ratio e/m of electron by creating electron beam and making it spin in a circle using a magnetic field from helmholtz coils. According to the pasco lab manual for this experiment, the velocity of the electrons in the beam will be lower than theoretical (because of nonuniform acceleration and collisions with helium atoms which made the circle glow), and thus the lab manual says that our measured e/m will be HIGHER than theoretical...

But I thought our measured should be LOWER than theoretical? Since (e/m)=(v^2)/(2ΔV) where v is velocity and ΔV is accelerating voltage, then lower v for the same ΔV should yield lower e/m...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Think about it. The lab makes the simplifying assumption that the velocity is uniform throughout the trip of the circular path; as noted, the electron slows down because of interaction with the rarefied gas in the chamber. This means that the true average velocity is lower than the assumed average velocity. However, it is the assumed (initial) velocity that you plug into the equation you gave to determine your measured e/m; the theoretical e/m is the one where you plug in the true average velocity and will be lower than what you measure.
 
Last edited:
Jasso said:
Think about it. The lab makes the simplifying assumption that the velocity is uniform throughout the trip of the circular path; as noted, the electron slows down because of interaction with the rarefied gas in the chamber. This means that the true average velocity is lower than the assumed average velocity. However, it is the assumed (initial) velocity that you plug into the equation you gave to determine your measured e/m; the theoretical e/m is the one where you plug in the true average velocity and will be lower than what you measure.

ok I am still confused...
you say
"However, it is the assumed (initial) velocity that you plug into the equation you gave to determine your measured e/m; the theoretical e/m is the one where you plug in the true average velocity and will be lower than what you measure."

but the assumed/measured velocity is lower. thus measured e/m is lower. thus theoretical is higher than measured, not lower...
 
Maybe "the velocity of the electrons in the beam will be lower than theoretical" means that you overestimate the velocity - the real velocity is lower than the calculated one (based on magnetic field and radius), so the real e/m is lower, too. This corresponds to "your measured e/m is too high".
 
mfb said:
Maybe "the velocity of the electrons in the beam will be lower than theoretical" means that you overestimate the velocity - the real velocity is lower than the calculated one (based on magnetic field and radius), so the real e/m is lower, too. This corresponds to "your measured e/m is too high".


but if real velocity is lower, then my MEASURED e/m will be lower, not the real e/m. the real e/m is independent of my measured (lower) velocity..
 
You aren't measuring the velocity, you are measuring the radius of curvature of the beam.

When you find the curvature, you plug that in, along with other values into an equation to find the e/m. For a given velocity and magnetic field strength, the e/m is given by e/m = v / (r B). So as the velocity of the electrons decrease, the radius of the beam increases making a spiraling shape instead of a perfect circle. However, the lab doesn't take into account that the velocity decreases, it assumes that the velocity is higher than it really is and this higher velocity is the one used to calculate the e/m. That means that the e/m you calculate will be higher than it would normally be without the energy loss.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K