The 6th Spectral Series: Wavelength & EM Spectrum

[Sahar ali]

we know the five spectral series of Lyman, Balmer, Paschen, bracket, and Pfund their wavelength and also the part of EM spectrum they fall in, my question is why do we neglect the 6th series in the spectrum? and in what part of EM spectrum the 6th series exist and what could be its wavelength (λi and λf)?

 

[kuruman]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_spectral_series

 

[Sahar ali]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_spectral_series

thank you
i read the info given the link you shared but still did not get the answer that why this
Humphreys series the 6th series is neglected why it's not included in the textbooks?

 

[kuruman]

I can't speak for the authors of the textbooks, but my guess is that they didn't think that this series is important enough to be mentioned probably because the lines are rare and hard to detect. You have to understand that a textbook cannot include everything and that authors have to exercise good judgment and exclude items that according to their opinion are peripheral.

 

[ZapperZ]

thank you
i read the info given the link you shared but still did not get the answer that why this
Humphreys series the 6th series is neglected why it's not included in the textbooks?

What would be the reason, pedagogically, to include that in textbooks? Is the physics not clear enough using those series that were covered already?

Your textbooks neglect A LOT of other examples. I can rattle various forms of "photoelectric effect" that most, if not all, undergraduate textbooks omit. These books are meant to introduce you to the physics. They are NOT meant to make you experts in those areas.

Zz.

 

[Sahar ali]

What would be the reason, pedagogically, to include that in textbooks? Is the physics not clear enough using those series that were covered already?

Your textbooks neglect A LOT of other examples. I can rattle various forms of "photoelectric effect" that most, if not all, undergraduate textbooks omit. These books are meant to introduce you to the physics. They are NOT meant to make you experts in those areas.

Zz.

/
I got your point, can you please tell me in which region of the spectrum does it fall? do we use the same empirical formula to calculate its wavelength(λi and λf)?

 

[ZapperZ]

/
I got your point, can you please tell me in which region of the spectrum does it fall? do we use the same empirical formula to calculate its wavelength(λi and λf)?

Yes, because if you look at the formula, it didn't say "Do not use this for this range", did it?

This is why I asked why you needed to learn about more of the series, since the physics can already be understood using the few that are usually covered. If there is new physics here that is relevant to understanding the topic at this level, then it would have been covered.

Zz.

 

[Sahar ali]

Yes, because if you look at the formula, it didn't say "Do not use this for this range", did it?

This is why I asked why you needed to learn more about the series since the physics can already be understood using the few that are usually covered. If there is new physics here that is relevant to understanding the topic at this level, then it would have been covered.

Zz.

I wonder if there is another way to calculate wavelengths.
actually, this question was asked by our teacher during lecture.and I was not sure about my answer so I asked here in the forum

 

[Vanadium 50]

why this Humphreys series the 6th series is neglected why it's not included in the textbooks?

If 6 series were included, the question is "Why not 7?" There's an infinite number - when should we stop?

 

[Sahar ali]

If 6 series were included, the question is "Why not 7?" There's an infinite number - when should we stop?

each series have its own importance, does not it? if not then why peoples worked on and discovered more series 6 and onward. ??

 

[Vanadium 50]

So how many should we list? Ten? A hundred? A million?

 

[ZapperZ]

each series have its own importance, does not it? if not then why peoples worked on and discovered more series 6 and onward. ??

No, they may have some historical significance, or usefulness in some context, such as the Balmer series having visible range. But in terms of the physics, there's nothing significant or interesting.

Again, I asked for a pedagogical reason for wanting all these series being covered in a textbook. You have only claim that they are there and they must have "its own importance", but you never gave any specific reason for needing them as far as this being part of a lesson. Those are not valid reasons to include them in a textbook.

Zz.