Why Is My Calculation of Electron Travel Time Incorrect?

  • Thread starter Thread starter cheese825
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Figure
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the travel time of an electron in a cathode-ray tube as it accelerates from 4.00 x 10^4 m/s to 6.00 x 10^6 m/s over a distance of 2.50 cm. Participants express frustration over the perceived complexity of the problem, debating whether to use work and force equations or to rely on simpler kinematic equations. The average velocity is calculated, and some contributors confirm that the travel time can be derived from the distance divided by this average velocity. Despite differing opinions on the approach, one participant arrives at a travel time of approximately 8.2781 x 10^-9 seconds, suggesting that the original problem may be simpler than initially thought. The conversation highlights the importance of verifying calculations and understanding the underlying physics concepts.
cheese825
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
I cannot figure out what is wrong! (frustrated)

Homework Statement


An electron in a cathode-ray-tube (CRT) accelerates from 4.00 x 10^4 m/s to 6.00 x 10^6 m/s over 2.50 cm

Homework Equations


How long does the electron take to travel this 2.50 cm?

The Attempt at a Solution



(4.00 x 10^4 + 6.00 x 10^6) / 2 = avg velocity

2.50 x 10^-2 / avg velocity = answer

Why is that wrong?
(I assume the acceleration is meant to be constant)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org


cheese825 said:

Homework Statement


An electron in a cathode-ray-tube (CRT) accelerates from 4.00 x 10^4 m/s to 6.00 x 10^6 m/s over 2.50 cm

Homework Equations


How long does the electron take to travel this 2.50 cm?

This is the more appropriate place to put this question =-D

(I assume the acceleration is meant to be constant)

I am also making this assumption. I don't think you can do the problem without it, and I believe this is more or less true of an CRT.


So, this is how I set up the problem. You have two velocities of the electron. You can figure out the change in kinetic energy by \frac{1}{2} m (v_1^2 - v_2^2) (m is the mass of an electron). Kinetic energy put into an object is called due to a force through a distance is called work. Work is described by the equation W = Fd, (d in this case is our 2.50cm).

Using those equations, we can isolate the force on the electron. From there, the rest of the problem is pretty straightforward.

Good luck!
 


Thanks Tac Tics.

But it seems you are making this more complicated than it should be. This is supposed to be simple 1 dimensional motion problem, no need for Work or even Force.

Is it not true that given 2 velocities, the initial and the final, that if you find the average of those and then multiply it by the time, you should get the total distance traveled?

I am at the point where I think I'll blame the book for publishing a wrong answer and making me lose a quarter of my brain mass via combustion.

I have gotten an answer (8.2781 * (10^-9) and am convinced it is correct after working through it again and again. I'll gladly give sexual favors to whoever gets me the correct answer.
 
Last edited:


s = \frac{1}{2}(u+v)t

...one of the SUVAT equations for constant acceleration... this is esentially what you've used to find t... and it does give 8.278 * 10^{-9}... so i'd probably move on to something else unless someone else has owt to say
 


cheese825 said:
Thanks Tac Tics.

But it seems you are making this more complicated than it should be. This is supposed to be simple 1 dimensional motion problem, no need for Work or even Force.

I should have disclaimed my answer would not be efficient (I'm no physics major).

But at the least, it should give you something to double check yourself on.

Although, one technical point, you don't need to *know* the mass of an electron. You have
\frac{1}{2}m(v_1^2 - v_0^2) = W = Fd = mad (hehe, "mad"), but you can cancel the m's to get \frac{1}{2}(v_1^2 - v_0^2)= ad, isolating acceleration that way.

Then the distance at a time measured from the first point is given by x(t) = \frac{1}{2} at^2 + v_0t = \frac{1}{4d}(v_1^2 - v_0^2) t^2 + v_0 t. So unless I've made a mistake, plugging into your calculator: x(t) where t is your final answer should give you d. This will help you confirm if you honestly think you found an error in your book.

I'm trying this, and I'm not coming up with the right answer either. I will look at it more closely when I get home.
 


cheese825 said:

The Attempt at a Solution



(4.00 x 10^4 + 6.00 x 10^6) / 2 = avg velocity

2.50 x 10^-2 / avg velocity = answer

I double-checked the algebra, and this is correct.

From my above post, if you plug in d / v_avg into the function x(t), you get back d, so after d/v_avg seconds.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Thread 'A bead-mass oscillatory system problem'
I can't figure out how to find the velocity of the particle at 37 degrees. Basically the bead moves with velocity towards right let's call it v1. The particle moves with some velocity v2. In frame of the bead, the particle is performing circular motion. So v of particle wrt bead would be perpendicular to the string. But how would I find the velocity of particle in ground frame? I tried using vectors to figure it out and the angle is coming out to be extremely long. One equation is by work...
Back
Top