Transmission coefficient in a barrier penetration.

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the transmission coefficient (T) for an electron encountering a rectangular energy barrier. The parameters provided include a total energy (E) of 4.46 eV, a barrier height (U) of 5.02 eV, and a barrier width (L) of 949 pm. The formula used for T is T=e-2GL, where G is defined as G=√(2m(U-E)/ħ). The initial calculation yielded T=7.18E-4, which was identified as incorrect due to unit discrepancies and an inaccurate value for the reduced Planck's constant (ħ).

PREREQUISITES
  • Quantum mechanics fundamentals
  • Understanding of energy barriers in quantum tunneling
  • Familiarity with the reduced Planck's constant (ħ)
  • Basic unit conversion between electron volts (eV) and SI units
NEXT STEPS
  • Review quantum tunneling concepts and calculations
  • Learn about unit conversion methods for energy and mass
  • Study the implications of the reduced Planck's constant (ħ) in quantum mechanics
  • Explore advanced topics in barrier penetration and transmission coefficients
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those studying quantum mechanics and particle behavior in potential barriers.

simon8502
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
An electron having total energy E=4.46 eV approaches a rectangular energy barrier with U=5.02 eV and L=949 pm. Calculate this probability, which is the transmission coefficient.


I thought this would be an easy one, given that
T=e-2GL
and
G=\sqrt{\frac{2m(U-E)}{H}} where H is the reduced Planck's constant

I just plugged in the numbers,
U=5.02eV
E=4.46eV
L=949E-12m
m=9.109E-31kg

I found that T=7.18E-4, which is apparently wrong. Can anyone point out where I went wrong?


PS. oops I just realized that I should've put this in the homework help section. First time posting. Sorry!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Did you account for the units? Your energies are in eV, while your mass and length are in SI units. There are some factors to take into account so that the quantity GL is properly dimensionless.
 
Found that that the hbar value I used was wrong by a few decimals. Thanks for the help :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K