Rotational translations between L values and spectral lines

jonesy101
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
The question: Given that w=h-bar(L+1)/I. Suppose that we observe spectral lines from the HCl molecule at wave numbers (in cm^-1) 85.03, 103.73, 124.30, 145.03, 165,51 and 185.86 (wavenumber here is simply in the inverse wavelength lambda^-1). What L values do these lines correspond to?

My attempt: Knowing that w=2*pi*c/lambda I tried to set up a ratio between to wavenumbers and relate it to the original equation but couldn't find a set of integrals for L that matched my ratios. I don't know what to do.

Please help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jonesy101 said:
The question: Given that w=h-bar(L+1)/I. Suppose that we observe spectral lines from the HCl molecule at wave numbers (in cm^-1) 85.03, 103.73, 124.30, 145.03, 165,51 and 185.86 (wavenumber here is simply in the inverse wavelength lambda^-1). What L values do these lines correspond to?

My attempt: Knowing that w=2*pi*c/lambda I tried to set up a ratio between to wavenumbers and relate it to the original equation but couldn't find a set of integrals for L that matched my ratios. I don't know what to do.

Please help!
Perhaps you just need to allow for a little measurement error. You know ω is proportional to wave number (inverse wavelength). Try graphing those wave numbers and see what you get.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top