How Fast Do Photoelectrons Travel in Potassium Under 250 nm Light?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Calmeir
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the maximum speed of photoelectrons in potassium when illuminated with 250 nm light. The initial calculation yielded an unreasonably high speed of 2.42x10^15 m/s, exceeding the speed of light. A participant suggested converting the kinetic energy from electronvolts to joules to resolve the discrepancy. After conversion, a revised speed of 9.7x10^5 m/s was calculated, which is more plausible. The conversation emphasizes the importance of unit consistency in physics calculations.
Calmeir
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Alright, I am having some trouble with the following problem, because my solution I arrive at seems to be way too large. The problem is:

What is the maximum photelectron speed if potassium is illuminated with light of 250 nm?

From that I have

λ = 250 nm
f = c/λ = 3x10^8 / 250x10^-9 = 1.2x10^15
Eo of potassium = 2.3 eV

From there I tried getting the velocity by obtaining the kinetic energy.

Eelec = hf = (4.14x10^-15)(1.2x10^15) = 4.968
Kmax = Eelec - Eo = 4.968 - 2.3 = 2.668

V = √2K/m = √2(2.668)/(9.11x10^-31) = 2.42x10^15 m/s

So my calculated answer is 2.42x10^15 m/s which is much faster than the speed of light, so I know it must be wrong. I can't seem to figure out another way to arrive at an answer though. Any help is much appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your units don't match. You either need to convert the electrons energy to joules or it's mass to eV/c^2 (that's about 511keV/c^2).
Doing a bit of dimensional analysis is usually useful if you get bizarre results from a calculation.
 
Ok, so taking the K of 2.668 eV and converting to joules I got 4.3x10^-19, then plugging those results into the my final equation I ended up with 9.7x10^5 m/s which sounds much more reasonable, but I just want to double check that I did that portion correctly. Was that the result you ended up with?
 
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