Photoelectric effect , Superposition of sine waves

AI Thread Summary
In a photoelectric effect experiment, a monochromatic plane wave produces a saturation current of 6 μA. When the electric field is modified to include a second harmonic component, the calculation of the new saturation current involves determining the number of incident photons from both the fundamental and second harmonic frequencies. The initial calculations suggested a saturation current of 7.5 μA, but the correct approach requires considering the average intensity over time and the different energy per photon for each frequency. Ultimately, the correct saturation current is found to be 6.75 μA, indicating a need for careful attention to the proportionality constants and the averaging of electric field contributions. Understanding these nuances is crucial for accurate results in such experiments.
Terry Bing
Messages
48
Reaction score
6

Homework Statement


In a photoelectric effect experiment, a monochromatic plane wave of light falls on a metal plate. The electric field in the light wave at a point near the plate varies according to E=E_0 \cos (\omega t). This results in a saturation current of 6 μA. If instead, the light wave was governed by E=E_0 (1+\cos (\omega t)) \cos (\omega t), what would the saturation current be?

Homework Equations


The saturation current I_s \propto n_p where n_p is the number of incident photons per second and n_p \propto {E_0}^2.

The Attempt at a Solution


The given wave can be written as a sum of 3 sinusoids of frequency \omega, 2 \omega and zero.
E=E_0 \cos (\omega t)+ \frac{E_0}{2} \cos (2 \omega t)+\frac{E_0}{2}
Since frequence \omega can knock out photoelectrons, so can 2 \omega. The third term doesn't eject pholoelectrons.
I found the number of photons per second in the two waves (this is the part I suspect is wrong)
n_{p,\omega} \propto {E_0}^2
n_{p,2 \omega} \propto \left( \frac{E_0}{2}\right) ^2
and total photons incident per second would be
n_p' = n_{p,\omega} + n_{p,2 \omega} \propto \frac{5}{4} {E_0}^2
The saturation current in this case
I_s' \propto n_p' \propto \frac{5}{4} {E_0}^2
\implies I_s'=\frac{5}{4} I_s= 7.5 μA
However, the answer given at the back of the book is 6.75 μA which is like 9/8 Is. What am I doing wrong
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Terry Bing said:
The saturation current ##I_s \propto n_p## where ##n_p## is the number of incident photons per second and ##n_p \propto {E_0}^2 .##
I think you should pay closer attention to the constant of proportionality and how it is obtained. Is it the same in the two situations?
 
  • Like
Likes Terry Bing
kuruman said:
I think you should pay closer attention to the constant of proportionality and how it is obtained. Is it the same in the two situations?
Thank you.
For the original wave,
n_p= \frac{c \times \frac{1}{2} \epsilon _0 {E_0}^2}{\hbar \omega}
For the compound wave , no. of photons with energy ħω
n_{p,\omega}= \frac{c \times \frac{1}{2} \epsilon _0 {E_0}^2}{\hbar \omega}
and no. of photons with energy 2ħω
n_{p,2 \omega}= \frac{c \times \frac{1}{2} \epsilon _0 ({E_0 /2})^2}{\hbar \times 2 \omega}. (per unit cross section area.)
Total incident photons (per second per unit area) for the compound wave
n_p'= n_{p,\omega}+n_{p,2 \omega}=\frac{9}{8} \frac{c \times \frac{1}{2} \epsilon _0 {E_0}^2}{\hbar \omega}=\frac{9}{8}n_p
 
Last edited:
That's not what I had in mind. The magnitude of the electric field varies with time, therefore an average needs to be taken over a cycle. The average intensity is proportional to ##E_0^2##. Does the average intensity for the two waves have the same proportionality constant?
 
kuruman said:
That's not what I had in mind. The magnitude of the electric field varies with time, therefore an average needs to be taken over a cycle. The average intensity is proportional to ##E_0^2##. Does the average intensity for the two waves have the same proportionality constant?
It does, doesn't it ? Intensity depends on the amplitude and the wave velocity, which is the same for the two components.
When you say 'the two waves', do you mean the two sinusoidal components of the 2nd wave? This is what I thought you meant. Or do you mean the pure sinusoidal wave vs the compound wave?
Isn't what I wrote down in the previous reply correct? The average intensity is proportional to the amplitude for both the components, with the same proportionality constant, but the energy per photon is different. This is where I made a mistake earlier.
 
Last edited:
You have to consider that for every cycle of the ##\omega## wave you have two cycles of the ##2\omega## wave. So you should weigh the latter twice in order to find the appropriate fraction.
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Back
Top