Metals, X-rays, and plasma frequency

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between x-ray penetration in metals and plasma frequency, with participants debating whether plasma frequency corresponds to the frequency at which x-rays penetrate metals. It is clarified that plasmon energies are significantly lower than the x-ray range, indicating that plasma frequency alone may not accurately predict x-ray transparency. Calculations for copper's electron plasma frequency yield results in the UV range, suggesting that effective mass and permittivity values need adjustment for accuracy. The consensus emerges that the frequency at which electromagnetic radiation begins to penetrate metals aligns with plasma frequency, particularly in the UV spectrum. This understanding also sheds light on challenges faced in developing UV mirrors in semiconductor technology.
pervect
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Messages
10,406
Reaction score
1,587
I was wondering if it would be fair to say that the frequency at which x-rays start to penetrate a metal would be the plasma frequency associated with the electron density of the metal, i.e. the frequency given by

http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/PlasmaFrequency.html

or whether some other mechanism was involved.
 
Science news on Phys.org
Have you tried calculating the electron plasma frequency for some typical metals?
 
you wouldn't be correct. plasmon energies are several orders of magnitude lower than the x-ray range.
 
Last edited:
Tide said:
Have you tried calculating the electron plasma frequency for some typical metals?

Using the MKS formula at

http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1529021

and using N = 8.47 * 10^28 / m^3 for copper

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/tables/fermi.html#c2

I am currently getting 2.6*10^15 hz

This seems to probably be a bit low, in the UV range. But I don't know what the effective mass of an electron in copper should be, nor do I know what the permittivity value should be - they probably shouldn't be the free-space values I used for both.

I also don't really know when copper starts transmitting x-rays, for that matter :-(.
 
inha said:
you wouldn't be correct. plasmon energies are several orders of magnitude lower than the x-ray range.

What's a plasmon?

It looks like the estimate in terms of plasma frequency misses the mark by a few orders of magnitude from remarks that have been made - any ideas of how can it be "fixed up" to get within, say, one order of magnitude?
 
plasmons are charge density fluctuations (collective excitations) in metals. same stuff but treated quantum mechanically taking the proper electronic structure into account. I don't think you can get much closer since in a lot of metals the electron effective masses aren't too far from the bare electron mass.
 
pervect said:
I was wondering if it would be fair to say that the frequency at which x-rays start to penetrate a metal would be the plasma frequency associated with the electron density of the metal, i.e. the frequency given by

http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/PlasmaFrequency.html

or whether some other mechanism was involved.
If you are trying to calculate the frequency at which a metal starts to become transparent to radiation, that would be the plasma frequency. Most metals are transparent at high UV frequencies.

So, to correct the statement in your OP :
...it would be fair to say that the frequency at which EM radiation starts to penetrate a metal would be the plasma frequency associated with the electron density of the metal...
 
OK, that answers the question, thanks. And it nicely explains why the semiconductor people have trouble building UV mirrors, too.
 
Back
Top