Exam Question: Relativity/Cathode Rays

  • Thread starter Thread starter Spastik_Relativity
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Exam Rays
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the calculations of the charge-to-mass ratio (q/m) and velocity of cathode rays, with a focus on whether textbook values account for relativistic effects like mass dilation. Albert's calculations differ from textbook figures, prompting Marie to suggest that factors such as non-ideal vacuum conditions and relativistic mass effects might explain the discrepancies. Participants note that the textbook values likely incorporate relativistic mass, given the velocity reported. The original measurements by J.J. Thomson showed significant variability, and current accepted values differ from those in the problem. The conversation emphasizes the importance of precision in calculations and the impact of relativistic effects on experimental results.
Spastik_Relativity
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
I just did a test yesterday and there was a question about cathode ray tubes, it went soemthing liek this.
Albert calutated the charge to mass ratio of the cathode rays to be 1.3*10^11 and his velocity to be 3*10^8. His answers didnt agree to that of the textbook. Marie another student, explain to Albert why his calculation were probably correct for this situation. What did Marie say?

I wrote that perhaps it wasnt a perfect vacuum so particle collisions may have slowed to electrons. Also mass dilation would have slowed to electron.

Is this correct? I am not sure whether the textbook calcultion already take into account mass dilation. Also my friend suggested length contration/time dilation would have effected its velocity. I wasnt quite sure becuase its not in an inertial frame of reference becuase the elctrons were accelerated to that speed. Any input will be useful.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Doesnt anybody have any input? i really do need soem help here.
the main question I am asking is whether the textbooks figures for q/m ratio take into account mass dilation or not
 
Spastik_Relativity said:
Doesnt anybody have any input? i really do need soem help here.
the main question I am asking is whether the textbooks figures for q/m ratio take into account mass dilation or not

Assuming the numbers in the problem are in MKS units, then the ratio certainly suggest the relativistic mass is being used in the calculation. From the ratio you could find the velocity required to increase the mass sufficiently to achieve that ratio. Your velocity number, being rounded off to one decimal place lacks precision, so there is no way you can verify the velocity calculated from the ratio is the stated velocity. To within roundoff error, the velocies would agree.
 
does that mean that the q/m ratio used in the textbooks is not the orignal one discovered by JJ Thompson?
 
Spastik_Relativity said:
does that mean that the q/m ratio used in the textbooks is not the orignal one discovered by JJ Thompson?

There was considerable variability in the values he reported. Here is the information he published.

http://web.lemoyne.edu/~giunta/thomson1897.html

Some of the velocities he reported were in the neighborhood of 10% of light speed, but not much higher, so relativistic mass effects are much smaller than the variation in his measurements. The value stated in this problem is considerably different from today's accepted value of 1.759 x 10^11 C/kg

http://www.nyu.edu/classes/tuckerman/honors.chem/lectures/lecture_2/node3.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
those are great sites thanks for the help.
 
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top