How Does Electron Kinetic Energy Affect Barrier Penetration Probability?

  • Thread starter Thread starter r-dizzel
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the distance at which the probability of finding an electron with 100 eV of kinetic energy falls to 1/e when encountering a potential barrier of 110 eV. The wavefunction solution is expressed as Ψ = Ae^{-βx}, where β is derived from the difference in energy levels and the mass of the electron. There is confusion regarding the meaning of "falls to 1/e of its original value," as the user seeks clarification on the significance of the exponential decay in the context of quantum mechanics. Additionally, the user mentions understanding the relevance of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle but aims to complete the problem. The discussion highlights the intersection of quantum mechanics concepts and the mathematical interpretation of wavefunctions.
r-dizzel
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
uncertain about this??

evenin' all!
wonder if anyone can help...

the question is this-

(sorry by the way if this is wrong place to post this, bit of a newbee!)

an electron has 100eV of kinetic energy, its incident on a potential barrier of height 110eV. At what distance x does the probability of finding the electron fall to 1/e of its value at x = 0? compare this with what might of be expeceted from Heisenbergs uncertainty principle.

ive calculated the wavefunctions in and before the boundary but don't really understand what the questions asks "falls to 1/e of its original value"? surely e on its own is meaningless?

the final part about the Heisenbergs unc princ i get but i thought i'd complete the questions.

would really appreciate any help

over and out

r dizzel
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The solution of Shrödinger function decreases as:
\Psi= Ae^{-\beta x}
where
\beta^2={2M(E_1-E_2) \over \hbar}
M is the electron mass and the energies must be in SI units.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top