algebra based physics
TRANSCRIPT
Slide 1 / 205 Slide 2 / 205
Algebra Based Physics
Quantum Physics and Atomic Models
2015-12-01
www.njctl.org
Slide 3 / 205
Table of Contents
· Electrons, X-rays and Radioactivity
· Blackbody Radiation, Quantized Energy and the Photoelectric Effect· Atomic Models· Waves and Particles· Quantum Mechanics· *Theory Unification
Click on the topic to go to that section
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=wOh5If8A52w
Slide 4 / 205
Electrons, X-rays and Radioactivity
Return to Tableof Contentshttps://www.njctl.org/video/?v=wOh5If8A52w
Slide 5 / 205
Physics by the 19th Century
Newtonian Mechanics.
Maxwell's Equations - unification of electricity and magnetism.
Thermodynamics - heat is another form of energy.
Speed of Light measured - and no stationary reference frame (luminiferous aether) found - helped lead to Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity in 1905. Many physicists were comfortable that nearly everything had been discovered and explained.
But then, things started popping up. Like the electron.
Slide 6 / 205
Cathode Rays
About 150 years ago, "cathode rays" were discovered.
No one knew what they were. Physicists working on the problem just knew what they could observe.
What they saw was that when a high voltage was connected to two plates inside a glass tube, making one plate positive and the other negative, then a shadow was cast on the glass behind the positive plate.
Furthermore, the glass surrounding the shadow behind the positive plate glowed. When more air was pumped out of the tube - approaching a vacuum - and the glass was treated with special fluorescent chemicals, the effect was enhanced.
Slide 7 / 205
Cathode RaysThat seemed to mean that something was traveling in a straight line from the negative plate (the cathode) towards the positive plate (the anode) and the positive plate stopped some of it - creating a shadow surrounded by the glow.
Since the "rays" seemed to come from the cathode, they were called cathode rays. Click on the website below the diagram to see it in operation:
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=Xt7ZWEDZ_GI
Slide 8 / 205
Cathode Rays
Light casts a shadow - so it could be light.
Or, it could be a stream of invisible particles.
Slide 9 / 205
Cathode Rays
What two ways could you check to see if the rays were charged particles?
One rule - you can't open up the glass tube!
Discuss in your group.
Slide 10 / 205
Apply an Electric Field
One idea is to apply an electric field across the path of the rays. If they are charged particles, they will be deflected; if they are waves, they will not be.
Also, the direction they are deflected will indicate whether they are negative or positive.
+
-
Slide 11 / 205
+
-
1 In the below diagram, the blue line indicates the path of the cathode rays in the presence of an electric field. Are the rays:
A Waves
B Positive particles
C Negative particles
D Neutral particles
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=1qRgRvgdeXA
Slide 12 / 205
Or, apply a Magnetic Field
Another idea is to apply a magnetic field (shown with the red X's) across the path of the rays. If they are charged particles, they will be deflected; if they are waves, they will not be.
Also, the direction they are deflected will indicate whether they are negative or positive.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=bwK4i3b6YtQ
Slide 13 / 205
2 In the below diagram, the blue line indicates the path of the cathode rays in the presence of a magnetic field. Are the rays:
A Waves
B Positive particles
C Negative particles
D Neutral particles
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=A2rkX95bSw0
Slide 14 / 205
+
-
Negatively Charged ParticlesBoth experiments confirmed that cathode rays are streams of negatively charged particles. Also, when different materials were tried for the cathode, the same results occurred - they were independent of the material.
In 1897, J. J. Thomson used this experimental procedure of using magnetic and electric fields to learn more about these particles. He and his assistants adjusted the fields so they pushed the particles in opposite directions and canceled out - resulting in the particles going straight through.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=bctkm8A0gU
Slide 15 / 205
+
-
3 What would happen if the electric and magnetic fields were turned on at the same time?A If the electric force was stronger, the particles would
deflect up.B If the magnetic force was stronger, the particles
would deflect down.C If the forces were equal, the particles would go
straight.D All of the above.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=sH7Y2-ZoOSs
Slide 16 / 205
+
-
Learning about Negatively Charged ParticlesFrom measuring the magnitudes of both fields, they computed the velocity of the particles, as shown below:
ΣF= ma
FB - FE = 0
qvB = qE
vB = E
v = E/BSince they could measure E and B, they could find v.
FB
FE
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=DJ6oTeCRB1w
Slide 17 / 205
4 What is the velocity of a charged particle that passes undeflected through a magnetic field of 4.0 T and an electric field of 4.0 x 103 N/C?
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=Esu4PQKlsc4
Slide 18 / 205
5 What is the velocity of a charged particle that passes undeflected through a magnetic field of 8.0 T and an electric field of 6.0 x 103 N/C?
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=R-KMhpt8Cn4
Slide 19 / 205
6 What perpendicular electric field will allow a particle whose velocity is 610 m/s to pass straight through a magnetic field of 2.0 T, and not deflect in either direction?
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=Nipr74tQZaA
Slide 20 / 205
7 What perpendicular magnetic field will allow a particle whose velocity is 920 m/s to pass straight through an electric field of 8.0 x 103 N/C, and not deflect in either direction?
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=Jdvg14Q5u6Y
Slide 21 / 205
8 Then, the electric field was turned off, but the magnetic field was left on. What would the experimentalists see happen?
A The particles kept going straight.
B The particles deflected upwards.
C The particles deflected downwards.
D The effect depended on the velocity.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=PR8OHAobGMM
Slide 22 / 205
Discovery of the Electron
Now, let's see how J. J. Thomson and his team used all of these experiments to find an interesting property of these negatively charged particles.
They balanced the electric and magnetic fields so that the particles went straight through the vacuum tube. This enabled the team to calculate the velocity of the particles.
Then, they turned off the electric field. The particles were deflected downwards, in a semicircular orbit and struck the side of the tube.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=r32YLNqHcJg
Slide 23 / 205
FB
v
r
They measured the radius of the semicircular orbit, by seeing where the particles struck the tube and made it fluoresce.
From these measurements they could determine the ratio of the particle's charge to its mass: q/m.
Learning more about charged particles
Slide 24 / 205
Calculating Charge to Mass RatioThe particles had a velocity v=E/B before the electric field was turned off. The magnetic field now exerted a perpendicular force on the electrons, which caused the semicircular orbit.
Thus, the charge to mass ratio was determined.
Substituting in the set values for E and B, and the measured r:
Slide 25 / 205
The Electron
Thomson found that this particle had a very low mass for its charge. In fact, its mass per charge was 1800 times less than the previous lowest amount measured for a particle. Before this work, physicists were speculating that the Hydrogen atom was the smallest fundamental particle.
This led Thomson to propose that this negatively charged particle was new - and he called them "corpuscles." The name "electron" was taken from George Johnstone Stoney's work in 1874, and proposed again by George F. Fitzgerald - and the name stuck.
Furthermore, since the electron was so much lighter than the hydrogen atom, it was concluded that it must be part of an atom.
Slide 26 / 205
9 Which of the following is not true about cathode rays?
A They orginate from the negative electrode.
B They travel in straight lines in the absence of electric or magnetic fields.
C They are electrons.
D They depend on the material from which they are emitted.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=PNvPAJSdWt4
Slide 27 / 205
Discovery of the Electron
Thomson used a Crooke's Tube as shown above. Electrons were emitted from the cathode on the left, and were deflected by an electric field set up in the middle of the apparatus.
Here's a replica of the Crooke's Tube used by J.J. Thomson at Cambridge University.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=iDY0OCBtzOM
Slide 28 / 205
Discovery of the Electron
A replica of the third Mass Spectrometer used by J. J. Thomson (you may have seen that in the Magnetism chapter), that he used to continue to refine the charge to mass ratio of the electron. Electrons enter the Spectrometer from the right, into the velocity selector, then through the magnetic field which separates out the particles according to their mass.
Slide 29 / 205
Finding the charge on the Electron
Now that Thomson measured the charge to mass ratio of the electron, if physicists could figure out either the charge or the mass, they would know both quantities.
Thomson and his team then made an attempt to measure the charge of the electron, using water droplets in an electric field (don't worry, this will be discussed in a few slides).
Using this method, Thomson assigned 1.03 x 10-19 C to the charge on the electron. As we showed earlier in the course, the charge on an electron is 1.6 x 10-19 C - so although Thomson had the right order of magnitude, the percentage error of his measurement was 54% - not acceptable.
Slide 30 / 205
Finding the charge on the Electron
But, it was left until 1909 when a graduate student built on many years of experimentation by other physicists and actually refined the method in an afternoon!
Then, after months of tedious experimentation, a more accurate value for the charge on the electron was found.
The idea is pretty straight forward - but first, we'll talk about how Thomson and others tackled the problem.
Slide 31 / 205
Finding the charge on the Electron
In fact, we did some problems like this when we studied electricity.
A charged object will fall with constant velocity if it is in an electric field E such that qE is equal to the object's weight (mg).
mg
FE = qE
Slide 32 / 205
Charged Water Drops?
The falling object can't be electrons themselves since they're too small to see, and their mass was unknown.
Thomson and other physicists had been using water droplets and attempting to get them to float in an electric field.
That way they could estimate the mass of the drop and then see what charge was on each drop.
By measuring a lot of drops they could find the smallest charge, and figure that was the electron's charge.
But, the experiment didn't give an accurate measurement since the mass of the drop changes as it evaporated.
Slide 33 / 205
10 What problem to you see in using charged water droplets and observing how they fall?
A Water will contaminate the experimental apparatus.
B Water evaporates so the mass is not constant.
C Water evaporates so the charge disappears.
D Water does not conduct electricity.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=tvxAkDjIyiU
Slide 34 / 205
Millikan Oil Drop Experiment
A graduate student of Robert Millikan, Harvey Fletcher, solved this in an afternoon.
He bought a perfume bottle and filled it with very fine oil used for watches. Unlike water, oil will not evaporate.
He then drilled holes in a couple sheets of metal and connected a battery so that he could change the voltage to the plates.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=lkl4WNg9H1U
He used a microscope so he could see the drops fall. The method worked immediately!
Slide 35 / 205
Millikan Oil Drop Experiment
The idea was that as the oil was sprayed it would pick up some charge (just like the water droplets).
If charge was only carried by the electron, then when they measured the charge of the oil drop, it would have to be some multiple of the electron charge.
You just had to find the common denominator of the charge measured on all the oil drops.
Slide 36 / 205
He adjusted the electric field so a drop fell with constant velocity.
He estimated the size of the drop, and then figured its mass, since he knew the density of the oil.
So, he knew the electric field, E, and the mass of the drop, m.
FE
mg
Millikan Oil Drop Experiment
Slide 37 / 205
Then he calculated the charge on the oil drop.
He did this for a large number of drops, using the below approach.
FE
mg
ΣF= ma
FE - mg = 0
qE = mg
q = mg/E
Millikan Oil Drop Experiment
Many, many hours were spent by Harvey staring into the microscope watching the sparkling oil drops. The calculations also added in a correction for the viscosity of the oil drops (which provided an upward frictional force) and were laboriously performed without the help of computers (which didn't exist then).
Slide 38 / 205
The experiment was repeated again and again, with increasing accuracy, by many other groups, and the accepted value of the elementary charge is now 1.602177 x 10-19 C.
Millikan Oil Drop Experiment
Slide 39 / 205
Millikan Oil Drop Experiment
Here's a picture of the experimental setup that was used by Robert Millikan and Harvey Fletcher to determine the charge on the electron.
It all fits on one lab bench.
Slide 40 / 205
11 For instance, if you measured the following as the charges of six oil drops, what would you conclude is the charge of the electron?A 3.2
B 4.8
C 6.4
D 1.6
E 4.8
F 3.2
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=e0xoN0ARyWw
Slide 41 / 205
Properties of the Electron
The actual data were messier than the previous problem, and the units were in 10-19 C, but the conclusion was the same.
The electron was shown to have a charge of 1.6 x 10-19 C and a mass of 9.1 x 10-31 kg.
qe = 1.6 x 10-19 C
me = 9.1 x 10-31 kg
This charge is also called the elementary charge. It is the smallest charge found in nature.
So, the charge on any object is always a multiple of 1.6 x 10 -19 C.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=T_vLVH78f4Q
Slide 42 / 205
r
BTW, you may wonder why it's not called the Fletcher Oil Drop experiment instead of the Millikan Oil Drop experiment.
Fletcher was Millikan's graduate student and Millikan had made special arrangements for him to attend the University of Chicago without the established prerequisites and supported him throughout his tenure there.
Millikan had been working on the Electron charge problem, but it was Fletcher's idea that galvanized the research. Millikan wanted the main credit and, because of this project, he became the first American to win a Noble prize for physics.
Millikan Oil Drop Experiment
Slide 43 / 205
r
Millikan Oil Drop Experiment
Harvey Fletcher was able to author other papers on the topic and received this Ph.D. - and went on to do seminal work in stereo sound, acoustics, atomic physics and many other topics at Bell Laboratories and recorded albums with Leopold Stokowski.
An article was published in Physics Today in 1982, written by Harvey Fletcher, that he only wanted made public after his death.
In this article, he described his relationship with Millikan - and stated that he was happy with the way everything turned out and was very grateful to Millikan.
(Physics Today 35(6), June 1982)
Slide 44 / 205
12 Which of these could be the charge on an object? (e = 1.6 x 10-19 C)A 0.80 x 10-19 C
B 2.0 x 10-19 C
C 3.2 x 10-19 C
D 4.0 x 10-19 C
E All of the above
F None of the above
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=TLYZQmioGEk
Slide 45 / 205
13 Which of these could be the charge on an object? (e = 1.6 x 10-19 C)A 2.0 mC
B 4.5 mC
C 3.2 C
D 2.5 μC
E All of the above
F None of the above
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=UIy9qL_7yD8
Slide 46 / 205
14 The charge on the electron was determined in the:
A Cathode Ray tube by J. J. Thomson
B Millikan Oil Drop experiment
C Rutherford Gold Foil experiment
D Dalton atomic theory
E Atomic theory of matter
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=ip0ommy6Zb0
Slide 47 / 205
15 The charge to mass ratio for the electron was determined by:
A Robert Millikan
B James Clerk Maxwell
C J. J. Thomson
D Harvey Fletcher
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=AO5oT_tSJwE
Slide 48 / 205
X-rays
The Crooke's Tube that was used to study cathode rays, and then resulted in the discovery of the electron, was also instrumental in the discovery of X-Rays.
William Roentgen was experimenting with various configurations of the vacuum tube in order to study the properties of the cathode rays. He shielded the tube with black cardboard so no light or cathode rays would emerge, energized the tube and turned off the lights to check the effectiveness of the shield.
He then noticed, that several meters away a screen coated with barium platinocyanide was glowing. He had planned on using this screen later in the experiment.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=NdtCJh6FkEo
Slide 49 / 205
X-rays
Roentgen knew that the glow could not be caused by the cathode rays, so he theorized that some other kind of ray was passing through the shielding and causing the screen to glow.
Because it was unknown, he coined the term "X-rays."
Very rapidly, he tested other objects to determine the penetration power of these X-rays.
This is another example in science where a great discovery was made by accident. You can search on the web for other discoveries made like this.
Slide 50 / 205
X-rays
At this time, the dangers of excessive exposure to X-rays were not known, and many demonstrations occurred which would not be allowed today.
Only two weeks after their discovery, Roentgen took an X-ray photograph of the hand of his wife, Anna Bertha Ludwig, by placing a photographic plate behind her hand and directing X-rays at her hand.
The plate would show light where the X-rays touched it. If the X-rays didn't strike the plate, it would be dark.
Can you explain why the picture of Anna's hand looks like it does?
Slide 51 / 205
X-rays
Denser objects, such as Anna's finger bones and her very prominent wedding band would stop the X-rays, and this would result in a shadow on the photographic plate.
Less dense objects, such as skin would allow the X-rays to pass mostly unhindered through and the plate would be lit up.
Why would the medical professionbe immediately interested in this?
Slide 52 / 205
X-rays
Physicians could now see bone damage without having to open up a patient. If a patient had been wounded by a bullet, X-rays could locate them quicker than a doctor poking around.
There is a problem though; X-rays have a great deal of energy and can knock out electrons from atoms (ionizing them) and can disrupt molecular bonds. If you're X-raying a box to see what's inside of it, that's not a problem.
But, if you're X-raying a person - you run the risk of damaging tissue and causing radiation sickness. That's why when you go to the dentist, the doctor is very careful to shield your body with a lead drape to minimize your exposure. X-ray usage is very carefully controlled to minimize its side effects.
Slide 53 / 205
X-rays
Further experimentation showed that the intensity of the X-rays increased with denser target plates (anodes).
It was also discovered that the rays were not affected by electric or magnetic fields, as were the cathode rays.
What does this say about the charge on the X-rays?
Slide 54 / 205
X-rays
If the path of the X-rays were not affected by magnetic and electric fields, then the charge on them must be neutral.
Later research showed that X-rays were not particles - but another kind of electromagnetic radiation.
Slide 55 / 205
16 Compare and contrast cathode rays and X-rays.
A Both rays are made up of particles.
B Both rays are different types of electromagnetic radiation.
C Cathode rays are particles and X-rays are electromagnetic radiation.
D Cathode rays are electromagnetic radiation and X-rays are particles.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=2It6fPut7cE
Slide 56 / 205
17 What is the charge on an X-ray?
A Neutral
B Positive
C Negative
D It depends on its energy
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=K1rDns-0x9g
Slide 57 / 205
18 X-rays are very valuable for seeing inside of objects and people. Is there a danger of unlimited X-ray use on people?
A No, because the X-rays pass through tissue and don't impact it at all.
B No, X-rays do not have enough energy to harm humans.
C Yes, too much exposure to X-rays will cause ionization of tissue and break molecular bonds.
D Yes, and any use of X-rays is hazardous to humans, no matter how small.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=ELdrttoW7JA
Slide 58 / 205
19 X-Rays were first observed when
A protons impacted upon a metal.
B neutrons scattered off of a crystal.
C electrons passed through a double slit.
D electrons struck a metal target.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=wLDn0d88gZE
Slide 59 / 205
X-raysOther uses for, and understanding of X-rays came rapidly.
In 1899, Hermann Haga and Cornelius Wind demonstrated X-ray diffraction through a narrow slit, and estimated the wavelength of X-rays to be 1 x 10-9 m. In 1912, Max von Laue showed X-rays diffracting through crystals, which enabled the study of the structure of materials. Both of these indicated a wave nature for X-rays.
Then, in 1923, Arthur Compton showed that X-rays were acting as particles when low intensity X-rays were scattered by electrons.
Much of quantum physics focused on the different ways of looking at light and electrons - whether they are particles or waves. More on this later..........
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=iaH0lSnhh94
Slide 60 / 205
X-raysPhysicists like using graphs to understand what's going on. Here's a graph of how many X-rays are produced (y axis - intensity) at different wavelengths (x axis) for a target anode made up of a specific element. This type of graph is called a spectrum.
What do you notice about this graph?
Slide 61 / 205
X-raysYou can see a continuous curve, upon which are two very distinct peaks. The continuous part is called Bremsstrahlung and results from energy emitted by the target electrons striking the target, losing kinetic energy and releasing this energy in the form of light.
Slide 62 / 205
X-raysThe two peaks on this curve relate to the internal structure of the atoms that make up the anode - and will be discussed later in the Bohr model. Would you expect all elements to have an identical curve?
Slide 63 / 205
X-raysNo, you would not (hopefully, you would not). Atoms of different elements are unique and possess different internal structure. So, these spectra can be used to identify different types of materials - like fingerprints for people!
Slide 64 / 205
X-raysJust to show the uniqueness of various spectra - here's the spectrum resulting from a Cu X-ray tube. It has more peaks, and a higher relative intensity of the Bremsstrahlung at lower wavelengths.
Emission spectrum of an old Cu X-ray tube
Slide 65 / 205
20 How are graphs helpful to physicists?A You can make extremely precise calculations from
just looking at them.B They enable comparisons to be made between
different experiments.C They present a lot of information in a small place
and help you to spot trends.D B and C only.E A and B only.F A, B, and C.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=KYRqWC194H0
Slide 66 / 205
21 Multi-Correct: What distinctive phenomena are illustrated in the X-ray spectra?
A Bremsstrahlung - deceleration of the electrons striking the anode.
B Acceleration of the electrons after they strike the anode.
C Internal atomic structure of the anode.
D Cathode ray penetration power.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=_ZWHO8G1QXI
Slide 67 / 205
Radiation
A year after Roentgen discovered X-rays, Henri Becquerel wanted to see if phosphorescent salts (uranium) could be made to emit X-rays by exposing them to the sun (a source of energy, like the voltage in the Crooke's Tubes).
After much experimentation, Becquerel found out that the uranium salts would expose the photographic plates (they would be darkened) - just like the X-rays - but it didn't need the sun! It would work indoors, shielded from the light.
What conclusion could you draw from this?
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=0_V1tY6pqsc
Slide 68 / 205
Radiation
Before you answer, here's a picture of a photographic plate that was exposed to uranium salts by Becquerel. Once again (like Roentgen), a Maltese Cross was used to shield the plate from the rays, and you can see its shadow, where the cross blocked the rays.
Slide 69 / 205
The atom is found to not be indivisible!
Well, more people started working on this problem, and, most famously, Marie Curie, and her husband, Pierre Curie, conducted exhaustive experiments and analyses.
Their conclusion was that these "rays" were coming from the atoms themselves - and that they were not indivisible - they were breaking up and decaying into other atoms.
This is the real life version of what alchemists were trying to do hundreds of years earlier - transforming elements into other elements via chemical means.
Slide 70 / 205
The atom is found to not be indivisible!
But - chemistry is all about sharing and trading electrons - at energy levels much less than the newly discovered rays, or radiation.
The radiation, discovered by Curie and the other researchers had a much higher energy - which indicated they were coming from something deeper in the atom (which was found out in 1911 to be the nucleus).
Slide 71 / 205
Radiation
During their research, the Curies discovered new elements -Radium and Polonium - as they found different mineral blends emitted different ray energies.
These rays had a much higher energy than the Roentgen discovered X-rays. And prolonged exposure, without adequate protection, to these substances during her investigations led to Marie's early death from cancer.
Slide 72 / 205
Radiation
Marie was the first woman to be awarded the Nobel Prize (which she shared with her husband Pierre and Henri Becquerel), the only person to be awarded the Nobel Prize in two technical disciplines (Physics and Chemistry), and the first woman faculty member at the Ecole Normale Superieure.
Slide 73 / 205
Radiation
Subsequent research by Becquerel, M. Curie, P. Curie, Rutherford, Andrade, Royds, and many others, found that these rays were not all the same. By 1901, three new types of radiation were isolated:
Gamma Rays - a type of high energy electromagnetic radiation arising from energy changes in the nucleus.
Beta Particles - electrons from beta decay in the nucleus (this was the radiation from the Uranium salts that Becquerel found).
Alpha Particles - Helium nuclei.
What an exciting time for science! This will be discussed further in the Nuclear Physics chapter.
Slide 74 / 205
22 A difference between X-Rays and Radiation as discovered by Becquerel, M. Curie and P. Curie is:
A X-Rays were discovered by placing a substance in front of a photographic plate.
B Radiation occured only when an electric potential was applied to a Crooke's Tube.
C Radiation was spontaneously emitted from certain substances.
D All substances emit radiation.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=3DSRgA0jtfo
Slide 75 / 205
23 What was Marie Curie's conclusion when she found radiation being emitted from elements spontaneously (without an external energy source)?
A Atoms were indivisible.
B Atoms had no internal structure.
C Only electrons were being emitted spontaneously.
D Atoms were decaying into different atoms.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=s620P2t2Ar4
Slide 76 / 205
24 What types of radiation were discovered by physicists working around Marie Curie's time?
A Alpha particles
B Beta particles
C Gamma rays
D All of the Above
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=6nrrmWaGFOg
Slide 77 / 205
Blackbody Radiation, Quantized Energy and the Photoelectric Effect
Return to Tableof Contentshttps://www.njctl.org/video/?v=FM3diyh6OOk
Slide 78 / 205
Classical Physics continues to evolve into Modern
Physics
At the start of the 20th century, our understanding of the physical world was changing rapidly.
The electron was discovered. There was evidence that the atom, which had been considered to be the smallest particle of matter, had an internal structure.
Cathode rays were found out to be particles (electrons), and the distinction of ray like properties (light) and solid matter (particles) blurred.
Next, the very nature of light was to be challenged.
Slide 79 / 205
Blackbody Radiation
All objects emit electromagnetic radiation which depends on their temperature: thermal radiation.
A blackbody absorbs all electromagnetic radiation (light) that falls on it. Because no light is reflected or transmitted, the object appears black when it is cold. However, when blackbodies are heated, they emit a temperature-dependent spectrum, termed blackbody radiation.
Slide 80 / 205
Blackbody Radiation
At normal temperatures, we are not aware of this radiation.
But as objects become hotter, we can feel the infrared radiation or heat.
At even hotter temperatures, objects glow red, and at still hotter temperatures, objects will glow white hot such at the filament in a light bulb.
Slide 81 / 205 Slide 82 / 205
25 What are the properties of a black body radiator?
A It absorbs all incident radiation and then re-emits it at a different frequency.
B It is always black, even when heated to high temperatures.
C It absorbs all incident radiation and does not re-emit any radiation.
D As it is heated, it changes color from black to white to red.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=wiaSt07O86Q
Slide 83 / 205
26 Which of the following colors indicates the hottest temperature of an object?
A Black.
B Red.
C Yellow.
D Blue.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=ZHTt5b87c00
Slide 84 / 205
27 Which of the following colors indicates the coldest temperature of an object?
A Red.
B Orange.
C Yellow.
D Blue.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=IgyCYqmTdSI
Slide 85 / 205
28 Using Wien's Displacement Law, what wavelength is the maximum contributor to an object's color at a temperature of 4000.0 K?
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=QJWPhdNCXdI
Slide 86 / 205
This figure shows blackbody radiation curves for a black body at three different temperatures and the classical physics prediction of the intensity of its light at 5000 K.
Blackbody Radiation
The x axis plots the wavelength of the light emitted from the black body. The y axis shows how strong (intense) the light is.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=VdhnUH2UzuA
Slide 87 / 205
Blackbody Radiation
The red, blue and green curves are actual data. The black line is what the existing physics theory predicted what would happen when the temperature of the object reached 5000 K.
Just look at the actual data curves. As the object heats up, what happens to the light emitted?
Slide 88 / 205
Blackbody Radiation
That's right. The light with the most intensity shifts from the longer wavelengths, down to the visible spectrum - where it starts as red light (the right side of the visible spectrum) and moves to yellow, then blue, then finally at 5000K, all the colors are present - white light!
Slide 89 / 205
Blackbody Radiation
But, can you see a really big problem with the classical theory prediction (the black line) and the measured data (the blue, green and red lines)? A hint - the black line just keeps increasing as the wavelength approaches zero.
Slide 90 / 205
Blackbody Radiation
The classical theory shows that the intensity of the emitted radiation approaches infinity as the wavelength gets shorter - which is not what happens. Shorter wavelengths means the light is moving into the ultraviolet end of the spectrum. Hence, it was dramatically named the "Ultraviolet Catastrophe."
Slide 91 / 205
29 How does using a graph of observed data from a black body radiator versus the theoretical prediction of the data help illuminate problems with the theory? Students type their answers here
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=hS_l99zi1nY
Slide 92 / 205
30 As the temperature of the black body increases, what happens to the color of the emitted light?
A It goes from white to black.
B It moves from red to yellow to white.
C It moves from white to red to yellow.
D It moves from visible light to infrared.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=xn8HTazB-R4
Slide 93 / 205
31 What is the problem with the theoretical prediction of the black body's behavior as its temperature increases?
A The theory predicts that the intensity of the emitted light does not change as the wavelength decreases.
B The theory predicts that the intensity of the emitted light approaches zero as the wavelength increases.
C The theory predicts that the intensity of the emitted light approaches zero as the wavelength decreases.
D The theory predicts that the intensity of the emitted light becomes infinite as the wavelength decreases.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=V33gjCarzN0
Slide 94 / 205
Because of this tremendous discrepancy between existing physics theory and reality, a revolutionary, and not easily understood new idea was needed to match the observed data.
The wave theory of light could not explain the way the black body glows depending upon its temperature (its spectrum).
So, in 1900, Max Planck made his brilliant assumption that atoms do not emit electromagnetic radiation (light) with any continuous value - they could only emit in multiples of small, distinct amounts of energy - called quanta.
Planck's Quantum Hypothesis
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=ahXZLuubpdE
Slide 95 / 205
These quantum amounts are given by the following formula:
E is the energy of the light, h is Planck's Constant and f is the frequency of the light.
Planck's Quantum Hypothesis
Slide 96 / 205
Planck's Quantum Hypothesis
Planck didn't believe this was real...it just worked. It was like working from the answers in the book...getting something that works, but having no idea why.
It didn't make sense that atoms could only have steps of energy. Why couldn't they have any energy?
Planck thought a "real" solution would eventually be found...but this one worked for some reason.
Slide 97 / 205
Planck continued his analysis to try and make h = 0. If he could show that h was equal to 0, he could get rid of this notion of quantized energy levels.
However, he didn't succeed because it turns out that "h" is a fundamental constant of the universe and numerous measurements made by other physicists confirmed it.
This now leads to another mystery of the physical world that would be worked on by Albert Einstein, and would use this quantum theory. It is the Photoelectric Effect.
Planck's Quantum Hypothesis
Slide 98 / 205
32 What discrepancy between experiment and theory helped lead Max Planck to his quantum theory?
A The discovery of Cathode Rays.
B The discovery of X-Rays.
C The Ultraviolet Explosion.
D The discovery of electrons.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=7t4YHMgYyac
Slide 99 / 205
Photoelectric Effect
Between 1888 and 1889, Heinrich Hertz, Wilhelm Hallwachs and Philipp Lenard performed experiments that showed light of specific frequencies incident upon certain polished metals would emit electrons.
Light Electrons
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=DiSiRhw1fII
Slide 100 / 205
Photoelectric Effect
Below a certain cutoff frequency of the incident light, there were no electrons emitted.
When electrons were emitted, their number were directly proportional to the intensity of the light, but their energy was independent of the light intensity.
The electrons appeared instantly when illuminated by the proper frequency of the light.
These properties could not be explained with the classical wave theory of light.
Light Electrons
Slide 101 / 205
Photoelectric Effect
Nobody could explain why this happened - if light were a wave, then electrons should be emitted no matter what the light's wavelength was.
And, if the light was more intense, than more electrons should be emitted. But that didn't happen either.
So, as Einstein looked at the problem, he made an assumption that had been made by Sir Isaac Newton.
Remember?
Slide 102 / 205
Photoelectric Effect
Albert Einstein theorized that Light acted as a Particle!
And the observed energies can be explained by Planck's Law:
And since the speed of light, c, was found earlier to equal λf, we have:
Slide 103 / 205
Photoelectric Effect
Actually, Planck first applied his quantum theory to light trapped within a box, stating that it acted as a particle - but he still theorized that light was a wave outside the box.
Einstein expanded on this and said light also acts like a particle when it's free.
He stated that light energy came in discrete packets of energy, that were later named photons, again, with the energy described by Planck. Thus, light is a group of photons - which act like particles.
Another example of how physicists continue to build on previous research in coming up with new explanations.
Slide 104 / 205
Photoelectric Effect
The quantized nature of light explains both phenomena:
· Electrons are emitted only when the light's frequency is higher than a certain value.· The energy of the electrons is not continuous - it has specific values.
Light must be traveling as packets of specific size - packets of energy - photons.
An electron is only emitted when a single photon strikes it. All of the energy of the single photon was transmitted to the electron, freeing it from its orbit - and since the energies only come in specific measured quantities - so must the photons.
Slide 105 / 205
33 What is the energy of a photon with a frequency of 5.00 x 1022 Hz?
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=LYvZnez7J9A
Slide 106 / 205
34 What is the wavelength of a photon with an energy of 5.00 x 10-11 J?
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=_x5dAb0_bp0
Slide 107 / 205
35 If the wavelength of a photon is cut in half, what is the new value of its energy in terms of its original energy?
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=nsDI2XmVeFw
Slide 108 / 205
36 The ratio of energy to frequency for a photon is
A its amplitude.
B its velocity.
C Planck's constant.
D its Work function.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=vg1_2RLknUg
Slide 109 / 205
37 What is a photon?
A An electron in an excited state.
B A small packet of electromagnetic energy that acts as a particle.
C One form of a nucleon - one of the particles that makes up the nucleus.
D An electron that has been made electrically neutral.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=Vp9GG0VHw20
Slide 110 / 205
38 The energy of a photon depends on
A its amplitude.
B its velocity.
C its frequency.
D All of the above.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=-JWb9hsCYq0
Slide 111 / 205
39 The Photoelectric Effect was explained by treating light as a
A particle.
B wave.
C a wave and a particle.
D None of the above.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=5s8NKmznSi0
Slide 112 / 205
Photon Theory of Light Let's look at a plot of the kinetic energy of escaping electrons vs. the frequency of incident light.
This graph cannot be explained by the wave theory of light.
This shows that light is made of particles, photons; light is not a wave.
But, what do you notice about this graph for low frequencies?
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=-QFjMYWEHH8
Slide 113 / 205
Photon Theory of Light Light with a frequency less than a cutoff frequency, f 0, will not emit any electrons. But what about light with a frequency greater than f0?
It will emit electrons with a maximum KE. But, notice that the y intercept of the graph is below the x axis.
What does that mean?
Slide 114 / 205
Photoelectric Effect
Not, all of the photon's energy went into the electron. Electrons are bound to their atoms, so a minimum amount of energy is required to free them. This energy is called the work function (W), and the equation for the maximum kinetic energy of the emitted electron is:
So, "-W" is the y intercept of the previous graph.
All of the observed properties of the Photoelectric Effect were explained by Einstein's work (for which he received his only Nobel Prize).
Moreover, it reintroduced Newton's idea that light was composed of particles!
Slide 115 / 205
Photoelectric Effect
We now have Einstein reintroducing Newton's idea that light was composed of particles and his explanation exactly matched the observable data.
Which is great - for the Photoelectric Effect and Einstein's career.
But now we have various phenomena being explained by assuming light is a particle and some by assuming light is a wave.
What is Light really?
We'll come back to that in the Waves and Particles section of this chapter. But, for now - we're moving on to Atomic Models - which will lead to more surprises.
Slide 116 / 205
40 A photoelectric cell has a work function of 5.0 x 10-19 J. What is the minimum frequency of the incident light that will eject electrons from its surface?
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=bvUxx5aKnrI
Slide 117 / 205
41 Light, with a frequency of 9.5 x 1014 Hz, is incident upon a photoelectric cell with a work function of 5.0 x 10-19 J. What is the maximum kinetic energy of the ejected electrons?
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=8ChFjqQywQk
Slide 118 / 205
Atomic Models
Return to Tableof Contents
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=2xHjW0pHK7k
Slide 119 / 205
Evolution of Atomic Models
The atom was originally viewed around 400 B.C. by the Greek philosophers as an indivisible object whose shape depended on its macro physical properties. e.g., water "atoms" would be slippery, and iron "atoms" would be very solid and hard.
It wasn't until 1802, when John Dalton, based on experimental research, proposed that elements were made up of specific atoms that would combine with each other - and were indivisible, and could not be altered by chemical means.
Then models evolved very rapidly, starting with Thomson's discovery of the electron.
Slide 120 / 205
Thomson's Plum Pudding ModelThomson's discovery of the electron was the first evidence that the atom had an underlying structure.
In 1904, he proposed that the electrons moved about within a mass of positive charge - he never really said what the positive charges were.
A plum pudding is an English dessert where raisins (used to be called plums in England) are embedded in an egg, suet and molasses mixture, hence the nickname.
But, the model could not explain the different wavelengths of light emitted by excited atoms.
Slide 121 / 205
Rutherford ModelThe Plum Pudding Model only lasted five years, when work done by one of Thomson's students, Ernest Rutherford, and Hans Geiger and Ernest Marsden established that the positive charge was concentrated in a tiny nucleus of diameter 10-15 m.
They aimed a beam of alpha particles at gold foil. If the atom were a plum pudding, they expected that the alpha particles would just plow through as shown in the top right.
Slide 122 / 205
Rutherford ModelBut, a very small amount of alpha particles were deflected; some were bounced right back to the alpha source.
As Rutherford said, "It was quite the most incredible event that has happened in my life. It was almost as if you fired a 15-inch shell at a piece of tissue paper, and it came back and hit you."
Hence, the conclusion that the positive charge was all located in a tiny region of the atom as shown in the lower right.
Slide 123 / 205
Rutherford Model
Since all the positive charge of the gold atoms were concentrated in a small nucleus, and most of the atom was just empty space, most of the positively charged alpha particles would not be affected by the positively charged nucleus.
However, for the small percentage of alpha particles that actually struck the nucleus, they would be deflected from their original paths, and in the most extreme case, just bounce right back. Rutherford proposed that the small nucleus was surrounded by electrons in planetary orbits.
Why do you think Rutherford proposed planetary orbits?
Slide 124 / 205
Rutherford Model
Probably because scientists were well versed in planetary orbits since Galileo, Copernicus, Brahe and Kepler.
And, by the similarities in the force equations for Gravity and the Electric Force. Since the equations are similar, and gravity causes planets to move in orbit about the Sun - why wouldn't electrons do the same thing about the nucleus?
Rutherford did not propose a structure for the orbiting electrons - that would be left to Neils Bohr.
Slide 125 / 205
Rutherford Model
To emphasize how much of the atom is just empty space - a void - if the nucleus was magnified so that it was the size of a baseball, then the atom would have a radius of 4 km.
The electrons would be the size of the period at the end of this sentence.
The below website presents a great simulation of Rutherford's gold foil experiment.
But, Rutherford could not explain the different wavelengths of light emitted by excited atoms. That also would be left for Niels Bohr.
http://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulation/rutherford-scattering
Slide 126 / 205
42 The Plum Pudding model of the atom was important because
A it was correct in every manner and lasted for many years without any corrections.
B it confirmed that electrons had a negative charge.
C it included protons.
D it was the first model that illustrated the underlying structure of the atom.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=1y0GFCyQsOA
Slide 127 / 205
43 The gold foil experiment performed under Ernest Rutherford's direction
A confirmed the plum pudding model of the atom.
B led to the discovery of the atomic nucleus.
C was the basis for Thomson's model of the atom.
D utilized the deflection of beta particles by gold foil.
E proved the law of multiple proportions.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=4AFE-1-0Jj4
Slide 128 / 205
44 In the Rutherford Nuclear atom model,
A the heavy part of the atom is very small and is surrounded by electrons.
B the positive charge in the atom is uniformly spread throughout.
C the positive charges surround the electrons which are concentrated in the center.
D the nucleus is physically large compared to the rest of the atom.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=2wqIN360cbo
Slide 129 / 205
Bohr Model
Neils Bohr applied Einstein's (and Newton's!) concept of light as quantized photons to the Rutherford model to explain the optical spectrum for hydrogen like atoms. These are atoms with only one electron such as hydrogen, helium missing one electron, lithium missing two electrons, etc - and obtained good agreement with experimental data.
Despite only having one electron, Hydrogen emits many wavelengths of light when it is excited - and this is what Bohr explained with his model introduced in 1913.
Let's start with these optical spectra, and see how Bohr applied structure to Rutherford's orbiting electrons.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=z_Icm5bYm00
Slide 130 / 205
Optical Spectra
When light is passed through a diffraction grating, interference causes different colors to show up on the detection screen. Heres a picture from the Electromagnetic Waves unit of this course:
With Xenon gas is in a tube, and an electric potential is applied to either end of the tube (like the Crooke's tube), the Xenon gas emits light with frequencies that are unique to Xenon. When this light is passed through a diffraction grating, it results in the above optical spectra.
The Rutherford model had no explanation for this.
Slide 131 / 205
Hydrogen Spectra
Here's the spectrum from ionized Hydrogen gas. This is important because it has been well studied and equations were derived experimentally that would fit this spectra. They will be shown on the next page. What's very interesting is that these experimentally derived equations would match Bohr's theory exactly.
InfraredUltraviolet
Slide 132 / 205
Hydrogen Spectra
An equation that determined where the visible spectral lines from Hydrogen would appear was devised back in 1885 by Johann Balmer.
In 1888, Johannes Rydberg expanded the equation to include the ultraviolet and infrared lines from Hydrogen and other Hydrogen like atoms.
Note - there was no theory for these lines - it is a fantastic case of matching mathematics to reality - and this is before any concept of Quantum Theory.
The constant in these equations that made them work was later named after Rydberg:
R is the Rydberg Constant
Slide 133 / 205
Hydrogen Spectra
These equations match exactly where the Hydrogen spectra lines were found by experiment.
Balmer series
Lyman series
Paschen series
Slide 134 / 205
Bohr and the Hydrogen spectrum
Neils Bohr looked at these spectra and, in 1913, proposed that the electrons orbited the nucleus in specific energy levels. And, when they absorbed energy, they would jump to a higher energy orbit.
Then, they would release energy in the form of light and go back to their original orbit. Remember E=hf; so the energy was related to the frequency of the spectra measured.
These orbits were quantized - so only unique light frequencies could be emitted. Not just any light frequency could be emitted - it had to equal the energy difference between these orbits.
And the orbits were unique to each element.
Slide 135 / 205
45 Albert Einstein used the concept of light as a particle to explain why the Photoelectric Effect only emitted electrons with specific, quantized energies. What led Bohr to use a similar explanation for the Hydrogen spectra?A The particle theory of light is the only way to explain
all of light's properties.B Excited Hydrogen atoms emit light of specific
frequencies.C Excited Hydrogen atoms emit light at all
frequencies.D Bohr believed, with no data, that light was a
particle.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=4uVOstf8rz8
Slide 136 / 205
46 The Hydrogen spectra were first explained by:
A Investigation of Cathode rays.
B The Gold Foil Experiment.
C Fitting equations to experimental data.
D Bohr's theory.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=jk6xwXN3gLY
Slide 137 / 205
Planetary Orbit Problem
In addition to the Hydrogen spectrum, Bohr needed to address the "planetary orbits" of the electrons. The electrons in the Rutherford model were kept in orbit by the Coulomb Force providing the centripetal force between the electrons and the positively charged nucleus.
That was good. But, as shown earlier in the 19th century, an accelerating charge would emit electromagnetic radiation, and since the electrons were constantly accelerating (centripetal acceleration), they would lose energy. This loss of energy would cause the electrons to slow down, fall out of orbit and collapse into the nucleus within 10-11 s. This doesn't happen, as evidenced by the fact that we're all still here!
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=cOVxugGzi1I
Slide 138 / 205
The Bohr Atom
An electron is held in orbit by the Coulomb force:
Slide 139 / 205
Bohr's Solution
Neils Bohr made the following assumptions to address the shortcomings of the Rutherford model. It is called a semi classical model as Bohr is combining classical physics with aspects of the emerging quantum world.
· Electrons could only revolve around the nucleus in specific circular orbits with fixed angular momentum and energy. The further away from the nucleus, the greater momentum and energy. When in these orbits, the electrons would not radiate electromagnetic energy.
· Energy is emitted from the atom, in the form of light, when electrons move between orbits. And, not a continuous spectrum of energy - the energy would be quantized - only photons of particular energy would be emitted, representing the energy difference between the allowed orbits.
Slide 140 / 205
Bohr's Solution
This is a model of electron orbits - there are three orbits (n=1, 2 and 3) that the electrons can be in. When an electron falls from a higher energy level (greater n) to a lower energy level, it emits a photon with frequency f proportional to the energy difference between the levels.
Slide 141 / 205
Bohr's SolutionHere's a quick tour through Bohr's mathematics.
The quantized angular momentum of each level is expressed as (where n is the number of the energy level):
The Coulomb attractive force between the nucleus of charge Ze and the single electron that provides the centripetal force (remember, Bohr was only calculating orbits for atoms with a single electron):
Slide 142 / 205
Bohr's Solution
Combining these two equations, doing a little algebra, and solving for the radius of each quantum level, we get:
By using classical equations for the kinetic energy, potential energy, angular momentum, Coulomb's Law, Newton's Second Law, and Bohr's quantum assumption, the energy of the quantum levels in hydrogen like atoms is determined to be:
Slide 143 / 205
Bohr's Solution
Using the radius equation from the previous slide, the Bohr radius (a0) is defined as the electron orbital radius for the ground state (n=1) of the Hydrogen atom (Z=1):
Radii of other Hydrogen like atoms are expressed as:
Notice how the orbits grow in size as the square of n, so they get much larger as n increases.
Slide 144 / 205
Bohr's Solution
And, by substituting in the values of the constants in the Energy equation, it is found that:
Notice how the energy levels are all negative, which indicates that the electrons are bound in the atom.
The levels get closer together, and closer to zero as n increases.
Slide 145 / 205
47 What is the energy of the second excited state (n=3) of the Hydrogen atom?
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=akHC3IGYs6M
Slide 146 / 205
48 What is energy of the fifth excited state (n=6) of the Hydrogen atom?
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=jdn3CfzfAsc
Slide 147 / 205
49 What is the frequency of the photon emitted when an electron falls from the n=6 level to the n=3 level? (h = 4.14 x 10-15 eV-s)
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=GEtv5QiunUc
Slide 148 / 205
The Electron Volt (eV)
In atomic physics, energies are so low that it's awkward to use Joules (J). A smaller unit of energy is the electron volt (eV).
Its value equals the potential energy of an electron in a region of space where the voltage (V) is 1.0 volt.
UE = qV
UE = (1.6 x 10-19 C)(1.0V)
UE = 1.6 x 10-19 J # 1.0 eV
1.0 eV = 1.6 x 10 -19J
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=UEaxif4zCb8
Slide 149 / 205
The Electron Volt (eV)It's also convenient to convert Plank's constant to units of eV-s rather than J-s.
1.0 eV = 1.6 x 10 -19J h = 4.14 x 10-15 eV-s
h = 6.63 x 10-34 J-s
h = (6.63 x 10-34 J-s)
h = 4.14 x 10-15 eV-s
1.6 x 10-19J 1.0 eV )(
Slide 150 / 205
Bohr's Solution
These calculations from Bohr are in excellent agreement with the optical spectra showed earlier.
The next slide shows the various transitions between quantum levels - and have been named for the physicists who first observed them.
The Balmer series of orbital transitions are the only ones that are in the visible spectrum.
Slide 151 / 205
Bohr's Solution
Bohr's model exactly matched the observed spectra and the experimentally determined equations shown earlier.
The lowest energy level (n=1) is the ground state; the others are excited states.
Slide 152 / 205
50 Which series of Hydrogen spectral lines are in the visible section of the electromagnetic spectrum?
A Balmer Series
B Paschen Series
C Lyman Series
D Rydberg Series
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=848XC0DCPCI
Slide 153 / 205
Bohr's Solution
The Bohr Model was a critical step in transitioning from the classical view of the world into the new Quantum world - in that he used classical equations to explain what was happening at the Quantum level.
Despite the accuracy of his theory in explaining the Hydrogen spectra, he had to make an incredible assumption that violated a well understood phenomenon of accelerating electric charges.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=Rh7gEfJSmEI
Slide 154 / 205
51 What assumption did Bohr make about accelerating charges that violated previous work in electromagnetic theory?A Electrons in an atom never radiate electromagnetic
energy.B When an electron was not in an allowed orbit, it
would not radiate electromagnetic enegy.
C When an electron was in an allowed orbit, it would radiate electromagnetic enegy.
D When an electron was in an allowed orbit, it would not radiate electromagnetic enegy.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=3z4xKU1H948
Slide 155 / 205
Limitations of the Bohr Model
1. The model is applicable only to hydrogen like atoms (single electron).2. The model is based on an assumption that accelerating charges do not emit electromagnetic radiation if they are in specific orbits.3. The model predicts the frequencies of the photons that are emitted when an electron changes orbits, but does not predict their intensities.
More work would now be done by Bohr and many other physicists to transition the explanation of atomic phenomena into a more complete Quantum world. Let's look at electrons and light together next.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=o6_KkN29Tqc
Slide 156 / 205
Compton Effect
In 1923, Arthur Compton scattered X-rays off of a graphite surface and observed that the wavelength of the scattered X-rays increased - the Compton shift.
He postulated that the photon,acting as a particle, with an energy E=hf, collided elastically with the electron. Since momentum and kinetic energy are conserved in an elastic collision, the scattered photon would have less energy after the collision; some of its energy would be transferred to the electron. This would be observed by the scattered photon having a longer wavelength.
Slide 157 / 205
Compton Effect
To derive the equation for how much the photon's wavelength is shifted, Einstein's equation for the relativistic energy of a particle is used so that a momentum can be assigned to the photon:
And, since the mass of a photon is zero:
This equation also shows that a massless particle (a photon) still has momentum.
Slide 158 / 205
Compton Effect
After solving the conservation of energy and momentum equations (using the relativistic versions as photons move at the speed of light), the following angular dependent equation was derived. It shows how much the photon's wavelength is shifted when it collides with an electron.
Slide 159 / 205
Neutron
With all these incredible theories and experiments in the first twenty five years of the 20th century, it's interesting that the neutron's existence was not proven until James Chadwick demonstrated its properties in 1932.Ernest Rutherford, in 1920, proposed that a neutral particle with a mass on the order of the proton existed to account for the atomic mass measurements of atoms.Experiments were performed before Chadwick that actually found neutrons, but they were mistakenly believed to be gamma rays or even protons.Why do you think it took so long to discover neutrons?
Slide 160 / 205
Neutron
Because of the absence of charge on a neutron, it was impossible to detect via Electric and Magnetic field manipulations that made the discover of the electron possible. Chadwick placed a small quantity of radioactive Polonium in an evacuated chamber, where it decayed by emitting alpha rays (Helium nuclei) that then struck a beryllium target.Neutrons were emitted from this reaction and were found to have the correct mass and a neutral charge.Neutrons (and protons) provide the strong nuclear force that keep nuclei together by balancing the repulsive Coulomb Force between the positively charged protons.
Slide 161 / 205
52 The Compton Effect showed that photons act as
A light rays.
B particles.
C both light rays and particles.
D None of the above.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=-ggtiBsXeLg
Slide 162 / 205
53 What is the wavelength for a photon of wavelength 3.0000 x 10-9 m (X-ray) that hits an electron, undergoes a Compton shift and scatters at an angle of 450?
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=Pnub90Hiexw
Slide 163 / 205
54 Neutrons have a
A neutral charge and a mass approximately equal to an electron.
B neutral charge and a mass approximately equal to a proton.
C negative charge and a mass approximately equal to a proton.
D positive charge and a mass approximately equal to an electron.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=QoWS4_wP8EQ
Slide 164 / 205
Waves and Particles
Return to Tableof Contentshttps://www.njctl.org/video/?v=26eUnWGHyY0
Slide 165 / 205
Light described as a Particle and as a Wave
Newton first described light as a group of corpuscles (particles) and was able to explain reflection, refraction and dispersion.
Thomas Young and others found a wave like description was the only way to explain diffraction phenomena.
James Clerk Maxwell described light as perpendicular magnetic and electric fields moving as a wave.
Einstein brought back the particle model to describe the Photoelectric Effect.
Arthur Compton used the particle model to explain the frequency shift of scattered photons off of electrons.
Slide 166 / 205
Light described as a Particle and as a Wave
Physicists love symmetry.
Light has been described as being both a wave and a particle.
So, since electrons were discovered, and well understood as a particle.....what could physicists be thinking about?
Slide 167 / 205
What about Matter - can it be described as a wave?
Since light had been described both as waves and particles, Louis de Broglie, in 1924, proposed that particles could be described as waves, with a wavelength equal to:
This is the same equation that Compton used to determine the momentum of a photon.
Thus, all particles, and by extension, objects like baseballs and bowling balls have a de Broglie wavelength associated with their motion! But, since h is so very small, the wavelength associated with large objects is vanishingly small.
Slide 168 / 205
Electrons described as a Wave
However, for small particles, like electrons, their wavelengths are often 10-10 m, which are about the size of the atom, so one might expect that they could experience wavelike effects like diffraction and interference.
de Broglie proposed that an interference experiment be set up with crystals and electrons to validate his theory. But no one tried until decades later.
Slide 169 / 205
Electrons described as a Wave
In 1927, Clinton Davisson and Lester Germer were studying how electrons bounce off a nickel surface. During the experiment, an accident occurred that resulted in the scarring of the nickel surface, making it act like a three dimensional diffraction grating.
They were startled to find an interference pattern in the scattering! Electrons were diffractingas if they were waves.
This was the first experimentalproof of de Broglie's hypothesis.
Slide 170 / 205
Wave Nature of Matter
Later on, the two-slit experiment that showed light was a wave, as performed by Thomas Young in 1803, was replicated with electrons where the de Broglie wavelength of the electrons was on the same order as the distance between and the width of the two slits.
Electrons fired one at a time towards two slits show the same interference pattern as light did when they land on a distant screen.
This indicates that something like an "electron wave" must go through both slits at the same time - which is something we can't imagine a single particle doing - but the data have been shown over and over to be valid.
Slide 171 / 205
These photos show electrons being fired one at a time through two slits. Each exposure was made after a slightly longer time.
It appears that individual electrons behave like a wave and pass through both slits.
But each electron must be a particle when it strikes the film, or it wouldn't make one dot on the film, it would be spread out.
This one picture shows that matter appears to act as a particle and a wave at the electron level!
Electrons acting like a wave and a particle
Slide 172 / 205
55 What assumption did de Broglie make when he was studying the electron?
A Since light can behave like a particle and a wave, electrons could also behave like a wave.
B Electrons are not particles, they are waves.
C Electrons only exhibit particle like behavior.
D Electrons do not interract with light.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=cYZCUkPLTiw
Slide 173 / 205
56 If particles act like waves, why do we not observe the wave behavior of a thrown baseball?
A Wave behavior only applies to electrons.
B The de Broglie wavelength of a thrown baseball is too small to be observed.
C The de Broglie wavelength of a thrown baseball is too large to be observed.
D You can observe the wave behavior of a thrown baseball.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=zjVeBfNW-xI
Slide 174 / 205
57 What is the de Broglie wavelength of a 0.145 kg baseball moving at 40.0 m/s?
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=0lo0gkGtNTQ
Slide 175 / 205
58 What is the de Broglie wavelength of an electron moving at 2.50 x 107 m/s?
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=-MwuzMgmbqk
Slide 176 / 205
de Broglie’s Hypothesis Applied to Atoms
A weakness of the Bohr Model is that Bohr just stated, without an explanation, that an electron in an allowed orbit did not radiate. Physicists (and people in general) like to have explanations!
But de Broglie's wave theory of matter explained it very well. As long as the circumference of an orbit was an integral multiple of the de Broglie wavelength of an electron in that orbit, it would not radiate.
This approach yields the same relation that Bohr had proposed. In addition, it makes more reasonable the fact that the electrons do not radiate, as one would otherwise expect from an accelerating charge.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=lvjSKNuCNQ8
Slide 177 / 205
de Broglie’s Hypothesis Applied to Atoms
These are circular standing waves for n = 2, 3, and 5. As long as the circumference of the orbit matched an integral number of the electron's de Broglie wavelength, it would not radiate. This also explains why its angular momentum is also quantized.
Slide 178 / 205
Quantum Mechanics
Return to Tableof Contents
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=LCo_9DXaBP0
Slide 179 / 205
Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle
The pieces were now in place for a way to rationalize all these seemingly contradictory wave and particle behaviors of light and matter. But first - another weird observation.
A driving force behind physics has been the criticality of making accurate measurements of physical phenomena, and making predictions based on these measurements.
This still holds for Quantum Physics, but with a twist - there are times when the more accurate a measurement that you make of one quantity, the less accurate a measurement you can make of a complementary quantity.
This is expressed in the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, published by Walter Heisenberg in 1927.
Slide 180 / 205
Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle
The first two quantities that cannot both be measured precisely at the same time are momentum and position - the more accurately that momentum can be observed, the less sure you are of where the particle (photon, electron, neutron, etc.) is located. This imprecision, or uncertainty, is represented by Δpx for momentum in the x direction, and Δx for the position in the x direction. Here's the equation:
Δpx Δx ≥ h
Planck's constant sets the limit for how accurate the measurements of momentum and position can be at the same time.
Slide 181 / 205
Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle
This equation also works at our level - where we measure, for example, the positions of cars and their momenta.
Δpx Δx ≥ h
If that's the case (and it is), why do we feel we can very accurately measure everything we need to know about a car's size and its momentum?
Slide 182 / 205
Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle
Because h is so very small. Recall that h = 6.63 x 10-34 J-s.
Δpx Δx ≥ h
So, if I measure a car's position with a precision, Δx = 1 mm (10-3 m), I'll be able to find its momentum to a precision of:
We don't have any instruments that can measure a car's momentum that precisely, so we don't feel any restriction from the Uncertainty Principle!
Slide 183 / 205
Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle
Δpx Δx ≥ h
This expression helps explain why electrons remain in their orbits and do not spiral down to collapse into the nucleus. Neils Bohr theorized that if an electron is in a quantized orbit, it does not radiate EM waves, so it does not lose energy.
Heisenberg's Principle predicts that if you try and move the electron very close to the nucleus, then Δr (there's nothing special about x, y, z or r here - it just represents a distance, and if we're talking about orbits, the radius is what we're interested in) gets very small.
This implies that Δpr gets very large, and the electron will have a larger momentum which will prevent it from getting closer to the nucleus.
Slide 184 / 205
Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle
ΔE Δt ≥ h
There's another version of the Uncertainty Principle relating Energy and time as shown above.
Fortunately, for physicists making measurements at levels that we can all see, this principle does not affect these measurements due to the very small value of Planck's constant.
Slide 185 / 205
59 If you measure the diameter of a baseball to be 74.2 mm with a precision (uncertainty) of ±0.5 mm, how precise can you measure its momentum, at the same time, according to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle?
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=i2Gbu4GMIUU
Slide 186 / 205
60 An electron is measured to have a momentum of 2.5 x 10-28 kg m/s with an uncertainty of 2.5 x 10-32 kg m/s. How precisely can we determine where it is?
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=hUA4zelALiA
Slide 187 / 205
Schrodinger's Wave Equation
To explain the seeming contradictions between particle and wave behavior and the impossibility of measuring certain quantities simultaneously with perfect accuracy, Erwin Schrodinger developed the wave function, Ψ, in 1926.
Significant work was also done by Paul Dirac, and the two gentlemen shared the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1933.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=aAWocSauG-M
Slide 188 / 205
Schrodinger's Wave EquationIn classical physics, if all the forces on an object are known, all other quantities, such as position, momentum, acceleration, etc., can be found.
And in classical physics, we've always assumed we can measure things to an incredible precision, and then predict exactly what is going to happen.
Things act very differently at the very small level of atoms.
We've got light being described as a wave and a particle, we have electrons being described as a wave and a particle, and we have Heisenberg telling us there is a limit to how precisely we can measure position, momentum, energy and time.
Slide 189 / 205
Schrodinger's Wave EquationSchrodinger conceived the idea of the wave function, where electrons and light are assigned specific wave functions. These wave functions perform a similar role to that of Force in classical physics.
But - the major difference is you can only find the probabilities of a particle's position, energy, momentum, etc.
The key word is PROBABILITY, not EXACT.
Slide 190 / 205
Schrodinger's Wave Equation
An example of the use of ψ is in the double slit experiment for electrons. Young's experiment using monochromatic light incident upon two slits showed a unique interference pattern.
Electrons showed the same pattern! This leads to a key property of ψ - it is used to represent all the knowledge we have about an electron in this case. And, if a stream of electrons are incident on the double slits, the wave functions of each particle will interfere with the other particles' wave functions.
Thus, the interference patterns are explained by analyzing the wave functions and their interractions.
Slide 191 / 205
Schrodinger's Wave Equation
To find the probability of where a particle is, the wave function, Ψ, is squared. This was first suggested by Max Born.
Just to show the beauty of the Wave Equation, here it is for one specific problem:
Solving this equation for Ψ, will enable you to understand every thing there is to know about the particle. But, this is College level physics - even beyond AP.
Slide 192 / 205
Schrodinger's Wave Equation
The solutions to the Wave Equation show how the periodic table, electron orbitals, atoms, molecules, chemical bonds work. It describes the world at the atomic level - which is so different and counter intuitive to what we see at our level.
The Uncertainty and Probability concepts contradict what can be seen at the macroscopic level where we know, pretty exactly, where things are and how they're moving.
But - that's how nature works.
Slide 193 / 205
61 The Schrodinger Wave Equation is used to
A describe exactly where a particle is at any specific time.
B calculate the exact momentum of a particle at any time.
C calculate the probability of a particle being at a certain point at a certain time.
D calculate only the probability of properties belonging to electrons.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=ixv8jo2ouJg
Slide 194 / 205
62 How is the probablility of a particle being in a certain position calculated from the wave function?
A The wave function is the probability of where a particle is located.
B Divide the wave function by 2.
C Triple the wave function.
D Square the wave function.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=13zgLDRtofQ
Slide 195 / 205
63 What do the solutions of the Schrodinger's wave equation allow us to understand?
A Atoms
B The Periodic Table
C Chemical Bonds
D All of the above
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=4fnoJB7AJZM
Slide 196 / 205
Quantum Mechanics
Quantum Mechanics is very different from classical physics - for example, you can predict what a lot of electrons will do on average, but you have no idea what any individual electron will do.
It's also different in that there is a limit to how precisely we can measure phenomena. But - it accurately matches experimental observations, and it predicts other effects which are then verified by experimentation.
In Chemistry, you'll be using the solutions to Schrodinger's Equation, and the physics you've learned this year, to explore the nature of matter.
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=k_FNAewgVVk
Slide 197 / 205
*Theory Unification
Return to Tableof Contents
https://www.njctl.org/video/?v=o8Sm_wZJFTY
Slide 198 / 205
Physics StatusThis chapter started by discussing how physicists at the end of the 19th century were pretty comfortable with what they had explained. Electricity and Magnetism had been unified, and Mechanics and Thermodynamics were well understood.
Then Quantum Physics hit and the rest of the 20th century was spent explaining the physics of very tiny particles and objects that moved very fast.
And now, with the dark energy and matter hypothesis, it turns out that we've only been looking at 5% of the universe. There is much more to discover.
This unit will summarize some of the key developments after Quantum Physics started in the first decade of the 20th century.
Slide 199 / 205
Quantum ElectrodynamicsThis discipline provided an integrated explanation of relativity, quantum mechanics and electrodynamics that describes how light and matter interact and has made phenomenally accurate predictions that have been verified by experiment.
Paul Dirac and Hans Bethe introduced the concept, and Sin-Itiro Tomonaga, Julian Schwinger and Richard Feynman were awarded the Nobel Prize for completing the work.
Feynman summarizes this complex theory with three points:· Photons move from one place in time and space to another.· Electrons move from one place in time and space to another.· Electrons emit or absorb photons. Drawings of these interactions, called Feynman Diagrams, enable complex calculations to be made.
Slide 200 / 205
Electroweak Interaction
This theory integrated the descriptions of Electromagnetism and the Weak Force (that is responsible for the radioactive decay of nuclei).
These forces are very different at low energy, but at energies greater than 100 GeV, they are one force - the Electroweak force.
Abdus Salam, Sheldon Glashow and Steven Weinberg were awarded the Nobel Prize for their work in this area.
Slide 201 / 205
Quantum Chromodynamics
The proton and neutron have an underlying structure. Each nucleon is actually made up of three quarks. This is the field of Quantum Chromodynamics which explains the Strong Nuclear force.
Quarks are attracted to each other by exchanging gluons, and the further Quarks get from each other, the more strongly they are attracted (unlike gravity and electromagnetism - but analogous to a spring force).
Murray Gell-Mann, Kazuhiko Nishijima, Eugene Wigner and George Zweig were key contributors to this field.
Slide 202 / 205
Standard Model
This model explains the electromagnetic, weak and strong nuclear interactions and has 61 elementary particles - particles that have no underlying structure, such as quarks, photons, electrons, neutrinos, muons, W bosons, etc. Note that protons and neutrons are not considered elementary particles as they are made up of quarks.
Many of these particles can only be seen by colliding particles, such as protons, with each other at extremely high energies and then measuring what comes out. This makes the experiments very complex and expensive. The Large Hadron Collider that was built on the border of France and Switzerland cost approximately $5 Billion.
Nature is making it harder for physicists to more completely explain the atomic world!
Slide 203 / 205
Grand Unified Theory
The Unified Theory comes out of the Standard Model, and is still not completely explained.
The Grand Unified Theory seeks to add the Gravitational force to the three other forces covered by the Standard Model.
To date, there is no satisfactory Grand Unified Theory. Gravity is such a small force compared to the other three (an order of 1025 smaller than the Weak Force). And, it has not been successfuly integrated with Quantum Physics.
Slide 204 / 205
String TheoryMany physicists are unhappy with the Standard Model, as it has so many elementary particles, and it does not include all four fundamental forces.
String Theory is an attempt to fix these problems, by stating that all particles are made up of tiny vibrating strings, and the way they vibrate gives rise to different properties such as mass and charge which are evidenced as different particles.
It is very theoretical, mathematically beautiful, unifies all four forces and requires the use of multiple dimensions and parameters to explain the universe (and allows for the possibility of multiple universes).
Since it has not made any predictions that can be tested yet, other physicists consider it more of a philosophy than physics.
Slide 205 / 205
Dark Energy and Dark Matter
The universe has been expanding ever since the Big Bang.
However, it is not only expanding, its expansion is accelerating - which it should not be if gravity was the only force affecting the expansion. The expansion should be slowing down or remaining the same as gravity is an attractive force.
To explain this, physicists have proposed the existence of dark matter and dark energy, which comprise 95% of the universe and cannot be observed, but is accelerating the expansion of the universe.