Rydberg constant for hydrogen atom and Balmer series

AI Thread Summary
The Rydberg constant remains constant as it is derived from fundamental constants. Discrepancies in measurements related to the hydrogen atom and the Balmer series may arise from the limitations of the Bohr model, which is an approximation that neglects certain effects like fine structure. Additionally, the accuracy of experimental measurements can also contribute to these discrepancies. Understanding these factors is crucial for accurate analysis in atomic physics. The discussion emphasizes the importance of refining models and measurement techniques to enhance precision.
sss1
Messages
50
Reaction score
2
Homework Statement
Does the Rydberg constant change for different Balmer series lines? Like H_α, H_β, etc. according to the formula, it shouldn’t right, it should only change with the amount of electrons and nucleons? I googled some data and I put them into the formula 1/lambda=R(1/n_f^2-1/n_i^2) and tried for several wavelengths for hydrogen (n_f=2), I ended up with pretty close values but with minor differences. I was wondering if this is due to the accuracy of the instruments measuring the wavelength? Or is it meant to differ for different Balmer series lines?
Relevant Equations
1/lambda=R(1/n_f^2-1/n_i^2)
^^
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The Rydberg constant is a combination of fundamental constants and so it does not change. The discrepancies you are seeing are probably due to the fact that the Bohr model is only an approximate model and ignores some effects, such as fine structure. Or it could also be due to the accuracy of the measurements, as you said.
 
phyzguy said:
The Rydberg constant is a combination of fundamental constants and so it does not change. The discrepancies you are seeing are probably due to the fact that the Bohr model is only an approximate model and ignores some effects, such as fine structure. Or it could also be due to the accuracy of the measurements, as you said.
Alright, thanks!
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top