Photons and the Photoelectric Effect

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the photoelectric effect, specifically involving the calculation of the wavelength of light incident on metallic sodium, given its work function and the maximum speed of emitted photoelectrons.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between work function, kinetic energy of electrons, and the energy of light. There are attempts to convert energy units and apply relevant equations, but some participants question the methods used for calculating wavelength and kinetic energy.

Discussion Status

Some participants provide guidance on calculating kinetic energy and converting units, while others express confusion about the methods being employed. There is a recognition of different approaches to the problem, but no explicit consensus on a single method has been reached.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention the need to convert energy values into consistent units and the potential for miscalculations due to assumptions made about the relationships between variables. There is also a light-hearted acknowledgment of possible distractions affecting calculations.

frankene
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Light is incident on the surface of metallic sodium, whose work function is 2.3 eV. The maximum speed of the photoelectrons emitted by the surface is 1.26e6 m/s. What is the wavelength of the light?

I first converted Work Function to Joules:

2.3eV x (1.6e-19 J / 1eV) = 3.68e-19 J

The equation I know is:

hf = KEmax + Work Function

hf can also be written as:

hc/lamda

I thought I would substitute c w/ the 1.26e6 m/s and use KEmax as zero. My answer was 2.27e-9m and that is not correct.

I used the following:

f = Work Function / h = 5.55e14 Hz

Then I used:

lamda = v/f = 2.27e-9 m

If I can't substitute v for c, then what am I looking for with v? I have looked at this problem for 3 days w/ no new ideas. Anyone else have any?

Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Have you worked out the ke of the electrons?

When I do this I get the E for the light different to the value you give.

And I don't understand what you're doing with this
lamda = v/f = 2.27e-9 m

Find the Ke of the electron (joules) Convert WF to joules and add. This is the energy of the light.

Then use E = hc/lamda

I get 636 nm
 
Thank you.

I didn't realize I could find KE by using .5 *mv^2 and use the mass of an electron. Once I did that I added WF and then divied hc by my answer. The answer I got was 1.82e-7 m and that was correct.

Thank you again for the help. I knew I was thinkging too hard and not looking at the obvious.
 
good - don't know why my answer's wrong...one too many glases of wine before using a calculator?
 

Similar threads

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