How to Interpret Missing Energy Levels in Atomic Spectra?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Clara Chung
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Atomic Spectrum
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around interpreting missing energy levels in atomic spectra, specifically in the context of multi-electron atoms and quantum defect theory. Participants are exploring how to identify and calculate quantum defects based on provided spectral data.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the relevance of the Rydberg formula and the implications of quantum defects in the context of multi-electron atoms. Questions arise regarding the interpretation of wavenumbers as energies of levels versus transitions, and the necessity of additional information to resolve ambiguities.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered insights into the relationship between wavenumbers and energy levels, suggesting that the information provided may allow for the calculation of quantum defects. However, there remains uncertainty regarding the interpretation of the data and the completeness of the information available.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that there appears to be missing information necessary for a complete understanding of the problem, particularly regarding the spectrum and its relation to the energy levels in question.

Clara Chung
Messages
300
Reaction score
13
Homework Statement
Attached below
Relevant Equations
Attached below
241272

241289

I drew a picture of the information in the problem (not sure if it is right), the red lines are the given values and green line can be calculated using the formula given. I don't know how to find the defects because the energy from 100d to 100g is missing...
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think ## E_{ion}=-\frac{Z^2 R}{n^2} ##, (where ## R ## is the Rydberg constant) and for hydrogen, ## Z=1 ## (atomic number) and ## R_M=0 ##. I would need to do a little googling, which you perhaps should do on this one, but this equation is highly empirical, and not nearly as straightforward as the Bohr atom model for the hydrogen atom.
Incidentally, ## n ## is the principal quantum number. You might consult an advanced spectroscopy textbook to find out what they call the other constants in this formula.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Clara Chung
Charles Link said:
I think ## E_{ion}=-\frac{Z^2 R}{n^2} ##, (where ## R ## is the Rydberg constant) and for hydrogen, ## Z=1 ## (atomic number) and ## R_M=0 ##.
That won't work here. This question is about multi-electron atoms and quantum defect theory, so a quantum defect must be present in the equation. Also, ##R_M## is the Rydberg constant for a given isotope, so it can't be equal to zero.

@Clara Chung: I don't know how you can solve this problem. I agree with you that there appears to be some information missing. Can you post the spectrum that goes with the question?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Clara Chung and Charles Link
DrClaude said:
That won't work here. This question is about multi-electron atoms and quantum defect theory, so a quantum defect must be present in the equation. Also, ##R_M## is the Rydberg constant for a given isotope, so it can't be equal to zero.

@Clara Chung: I don't know how you can solve this problem. I agree with you that there appears to be some information missing. Can you post the spectrum that goes with the question?
241312

I am so sorry that I forgot to post the spectrum in the question... Here is it...
 
It appears that the wavenumbers given in the spectrum are related to the energies of the levels, not to the transitions. In that case, there are no unknowns and you should be able to calculate the quantum defects.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Clara Chung
DrClaude said:
It appears that the wavenumbers given in the spectrum are related to the energies of the levels, not to the transitions. In that case, there are no unknowns and you should be able to calculate the quantum defects.
Why is it the energies of the levels¿ the question says from 3p to the 100 levels...
 
Clara Chung said:
Why is it the energies of the levels¿ the question says from 3p to the 100 levels...
I interpreted this the same as you initially, but looking at the numbers given, the only way for this to make sense is to consider that these are energy levels, not transitions (compare to the energy level given for 100g).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Clara Chung

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
981
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
Replies
16
Views
4K