What Is the Rydberg Constant Value for Calculating Hydrogen Atom Transitions?

  • Thread starter Thread starter craig.16
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bohr Quantisation
Click For Summary
The Rydberg constant value for calculating hydrogen atom transitions is identified as 1.097373157 x 10^7 m^-1, which is crucial for determining the wavelengths of spectral lines. The ionization energy of a hydrogen atom is 13.6 eV, and using Bohr's quantization, the energy levels are expressed as E = -RB/n^2. The discussion highlights confusion between two values for the Rydberg constant, with one being related to energy in joules and the other to spectral calculations. The correct application of the Rydberg formula for the Balmer series transition from n=3 to n=2 yields a wavelength of 656 nm, indicating a visible spectral line. Proper formatting for equations in the forum is also addressed, enhancing clarity in communication.
craig.16
Messages
40
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The ionisation energy of a single hydrogen atom is 13.6 eV. The application of Bohr quantisation to the hydrogen atom results in the stationary states having discrete energies given in terms of a positive integer n according to

E=-RB/n2

where RB is the Rydberg constant. Determine the value of the Rydberg constant. Assuming like Bohr that, when an atom emits or absorbs radiation, it does so in the form of a single quantum, compute the wavelength of the spectral line of the Balmer series (the transition from n=3 to n=2) for hydrogen.

Homework Equations


E=-RB/n2
\stackrel{1}{\lambda}=RB[\stackrel{1}{n<sub>1</sub><sup>2</sup>}-\stackrel{1}{n<sub>2</sub><sup>2</sup>}]


The Attempt at a Solution


Ok my main issue with this whole question is which value is the Rydberg constant. Is it:
2.18*10-18J or 1.097373157*107m-1 (or both)

If I go with the first value, I can easily obtain that using the first equation as it mentions in the equation "it does so in the form of a single quantum", meaning that n in the equation is equal to 1 and its a simple case of multiplying 13.6 eV by 1.6*10-19 to convert it to joules giving 2.18*10-18J.

For the second part however I cannot get a reasonable answer using this value of the Rydberg constant, only with the second one as shown below:

Using first value:
\stackrel{1}{\lambda}=(2.18*10-18)[\stackrel{1}{4}-\stackrel{1}{9}]
lambda=3.03*10-19m

Using second value:
\stackrel{1}{\lambda}=(1.097373157*107)[\stackrel{1}{4}-\stackrel{1}{9}]
=656nm (visible)

Im guessing that the constant is both values but I've missed a conversion somewhere. Either that or there is something missing in the second equation to amend this issue with using 2.18*10-18J.

Finally, how do you do fractions on this properly because as you can see on my post, its separated each fraction from the equation and has somehow enlarged itself. I haven't used this forum that much so I'm still unsure on things like this.

Thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There's the Rydberg constant, which you found correctly to be

R_\infty = 1.097\times10^7~\textrm{m}^{-1}

and the related Rydberg unit of energy, which is

1~\textrm{Ry} = hcR_\infty = 13.6~\textrm{eV}

Your first equation uses the energy; your second equation uses the Rydberg constant.

To write the equation

\frac{1}{\lambda} = R_B\left(\frac{1}{n_1^2}-\frac{1}{n_2^2}\right)

you'd use the code

Code:
\frac{1}{\lambda} = R_B\left( \frac{1}{n_1^2} - \frac{1}{n_2^2} \right)

sandwiched between the tex tags. You should also be able to right-click on the equation to see the TeX used, though I couldn't get it to work here just now.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for explaining clearly which equation is for which. I just now went through converting the energy to the rydberg constant (per m) and it turns out it was a lot easier than I initially thought. Also I am very grateful for the code you've displayed regarding fractions on here. It turns out I actually used the wrong symbol in the latex reference, but I've found the real fraction symbol now so it's all good.
 
Thread 'Correct statement about size of wire to produce larger extension'
The answer is (B) but I don't really understand why. Based on formula of Young Modulus: $$x=\frac{FL}{AE}$$ The second wire made of the same material so it means they have same Young Modulus. Larger extension means larger value of ##x## so to get larger value of ##x## we can increase ##F## and ##L## and decrease ##A## I am not sure whether there is change in ##F## for first and second wire so I will just assume ##F## does not change. It leaves (B) and (C) as possible options so why is (C)...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
8K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K