Understanding the Beer-Lambert Law: Questions on Absorbance and Concentration

  • Thread starter Thread starter NLO
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Law
NLO
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi!

I am looking for help with understanding how to specify correct absorbance values for my little study project of modeling attenuation of light in a material.

Here are the sources that I am using:
1) The Wikipedia article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beer-Lambert_law

states that the absorbance of a sample A is alpha*l*c, where alpha = (4*pi*k) /lambda and k is the extinction coefficient.

Question 1: Is k supposed to be the extinction coefficient of the absorbing species?

Question 2: If I am using k to calculate alpha as in the formula above, this makes c to be dimensionless (right?). How shall I then understand c?

I found here:
http://www.ilpi.com/msds/ref/concentration.html

that concentration can be specified as percent by mass or parts per million. Is this the case? Shall the concentration in my case be specified as dimensionless? For example 0.01 for 1 percent of mass of the absorbing species in the material?

Thank you for your help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
k is the extinction coefficient for the material and the concentration c is dimensionless in parts per million. Plug them into your equation and you should be ok.
 
Dr Transport, thanks!

Did I get it right that k is meant to be here the extinction coefficient of the material not of the absorbing particles?

So if i have k=0.07 for light with wavelength = 400 nm, then I get the following expression for attenuated light:
I1 = I0* exp(-path_length * 0.01 * (4*pi*0.07)/(400 * 1e-9)),
where:
1) path_length - length of path of light in material (measured in meters)
2) 0.01 - concentration of absorbing particles (equal to 1 percent of mass)
3) (4 * pi * 0.07)/(400 * 1e-9) - the absorption coefficient alpha (with wavelength measured in meters as well)

Is this correct?

Thank you for your help!
 
From the BCS theory of superconductivity is well known that the superfluid density smoothly decreases with increasing temperature. Annihilated superfluid carriers become normal and lose their momenta on lattice atoms. So if we induce a persistent supercurrent in a ring below Tc and after that slowly increase the temperature, we must observe a decrease in the actual supercurrent, because the density of electron pairs and total supercurrent momentum decrease. However, this supercurrent...
Hi. I have got question as in title. How can idea of instantaneous dipole moment for atoms like, for example hydrogen be consistent with idea of orbitals? At my level of knowledge London dispersion forces are derived taking into account Bohr model of atom. But we know today that this model is not correct. If it would be correct I understand that at each time electron is at some point at radius at some angle and there is dipole moment at this time from nucleus to electron at orbit. But how...
Back
Top