How Does Maxwell-Boltzmann Distribution Calculate Excited Mercury Atoms?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the number of excited mercury atoms using the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution, given the energy difference between the ground and first excited states is 4.86 eV. The participant attempts to find the ratio of atoms in the excited state by applying the formula n2/n1, using statistical weights and the Boltzmann factor. They calculate a ratio of 2.626×10^-15 and multiply it by the total number of atoms, resulting in 267,884 atoms, but find this answer incorrect. Clarification on the statistical weights leads to a resolution of the confusion. The conversation emphasizes the importance of correctly applying the statistical weights in the calculation.
inferno298
Messages
25
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



You will recall from our discussion of the Franck-Hertz experiment that the energy difference between the first excited state of mercury and the ground state is 4.86 eV. If a sample of mercury vaporized in a flame contains 1.02×10^20 atoms in thermal equilibrium at 1613 K, calculate the number of atoms in the first excited state. Assume that the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution applies and that the n = 1 (ground) and n = 2 (first excited) states have equal statistical weights.

Homework Equations



n2/n1=g(E2)/g(E1)*e^((E1-E2)/(k T))
k=boltzman constant = (1.3807*10^-23), divide by 1.602*10^-19 to get in eV

The Attempt at a Solution



So I felt like it was almost a plug and chug. The distinct states at n=2, first excited state, is 8. For n=1 g(E1)= 2. Sooo :
n2/n1=(8/2)*e^((-4.86 eV)/(k*1613))
I got 2.626*10^-15, so that's the ratio of atoms in the first excited state compared to the ground state? So I just multiply it by the number of atoms 1.02*10^20 and I get 267884 atoms. Answer isn't correct though and I can't figure out what I may be missing.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
inferno298 said:
Assume that the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution applies and that the n = 1 (ground) and n = 2 (first excited) states have equal statistical weights.
Have you made use of the last part of this statement?
 
I guess I am not too sure of what that means.
 
nmv I got it Thanks!
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top