Photoelectric effect calculations

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the calculations related to the photoelectric effect, specifically for light with a wavelength of 452 nm and a work function of 5.77 eV. The correct frequency of the incident light is calculated using the formula f = c/λ, yielding 6.64 x 1014 Hz. The maximum kinetic energy (Kmax) of the ejected electrons is found to be negative, indicating that the energy of the incoming light is insufficient to emit electrons. Consequently, the stopping voltage (V0) required to prevent electron emission can be derived from Kmax.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the photoelectric effect
  • Familiarity with Planck's constant (h = 6.63 x 10-34 Js)
  • Knowledge of the work function in electron volts (eV)
  • Basic principles of electromagnetic radiation and its properties
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the photoelectric effect equations
  • Learn about the implications of negative kinetic energy in photoelectric experiments
  • Explore the relationship between stopping voltage and kinetic energy of ejected electrons
  • Investigate the significance of work function in different materials
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, educators, and researchers interested in quantum mechanics and the photoelectric effect, as well as anyone involved in experimental physics or materials science.

NewtonianAlch
Messages
453
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Light with wavelength 452 nm illuminates a surface. The work function of the surface is 5.77 electron volts.

1. What is the frequency of light hitting the surface?

2. What is the maximum kinetic energy of the electron ejected from this surface?

3. What backing voltage would need to be applied to stop all electrons ejected from this surface from reaching the anode?



The Attempt at a Solution



1) f = \phi/h

f = 5.77/(4.14*10^-15) = 1.39*10^15 Hz

2) K = (hc/\lambda) - \phi

K = (4.14*10^-15*3*10^8)/(452*10^-9) - 5.77 = -3.02eV

3) I'm not too sure how to start 3.

I'm fairly sure part 1 is correct, I didn't expect to get a negative value for part 2 so I'm sure that's not right, what did I do wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
NewtonianAlch said:

Homework Statement



Light with wavelength 452 nm illuminates a surface. The work function of the surface is 5.77 electron volts.

1. What is the frequency of light hitting the surface?

2. What is the maximum kinetic energy of the electron ejected from this surface?

3. What backing voltage would need to be applied to stop all electrons ejected from this surface from reaching the anode?



The Attempt at a Solution



1) f = \phi/h

f = 5.77/(4.14*10^-15) = 1.39*10^15 Hz

2) K = (hc/\lambda) - \phi

K = (4.14*10^-15*3*10^8)/(452*10^-9) - 5.77 = -3.02eV

3) I'm not too sure how to start 3.

I'm fairly sure part 1 is correct, I didn't expect to get a negative value for part 2 so I'm sure that's not right, what did I do wrong?

I disagree on part 1:

The speed of light is 3.00 \cdot 10^8 m/s and c=f \lambda this gives f=\frac {c}{\lambda} = \frac {3.00 \cdot 10^8 m/s}{452 \cdot 10^{-9} m}=6.64 \cdot 10^{14} Hz.

What are the \phi and h you are using?

BTW, When using formulas, you should not delete heading 2. It is much easier to help when we can see which formulas and variables you've tried to use.

For example, I'm used to that h is used for Planck's constant h=6.63 * 10^34 Js, you have an h standing for something else.
Thus it is sort of difficult for me to see what you have thought here ...
 
Sorry about that, for h I used a value of 4.14*10^-15 eV.s - which was given in my book as equal to 6.63*10^-34 Js

So I figured I'd use that to deal with eV.

The value of phi is the value of 5.77eV, the given value in the question.

I think you're right, don't know why I used that weird formula to calculate the frequency, I will take a closer look at it now.
 
Oh, so you calculated the frequency of the "electron radiation" leaving the surface... :smile:

Since 1) asked for the freqecy of the light hitting the surface you'd better leave the electron volts for a moment when answering it ... There the frequency depends on the wavelength of the incoming light, not the eV value from the emission, step 2 in the process.
 
I can't believe the silly error! Thanks for pointing that out =)
 
If the value for Kmax is negative, the energy of the incoming light is not high enough for electrons to be emitted. Could this be the point here? However normally you won't then be asked question 3), but I still assume this is a possible conclusion.

Otherwise the given work function is too high, and there is an error in the problem.
2)
Kmax is given by hf-\phi, where f is the frequency of the incident photon. Using the frequency found in 1), which gives 4.14 \cdot 10^{-15} \cdot 6.64 \cdot 10^{14} - 5.77 eV =, gives me the same negative value for Kmax as you found, which would imply there's no electron emission at all, because the incoming light has to little energy...

This is also (approximately) supported by:

Kmax=4.14 \cdot 10^{-15} (6.64 \cdot 10^{14} -1.39 \cdot 10^{15})= -3.01 eV where the last value is the frequency you found for electron emission.

3) Kmax=eV_0, where e is the electron's charge (1.60217656535×10^{−19} coulombs) and V0 the stopping potential (voltage). This can be used to calculate the stopping voltage to be applied. Just divide Kmax by e...
 
It did plague me for a while, but discussing it with a few friends I found out that they had similar answers for part 2, but I didn't understand why. I can see what the negative result means from your explanation, thanks for that!
 
Glad to help :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K