0% found this document useful (0 votes)
15 views19 pages

Modern Physics 2

Uploaded by

Rounak Das
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
15 views19 pages

Modern Physics 2

Uploaded by

Rounak Das
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 19

The photelectric effect

Photoelectric effect: It is the emission of electrons from a metal surface when


irradiated with electromagnetic radiation

First observed by Hertz in 1887


Photoelectric effect

• The classical electromagnetic theory fails to account for the experimental results.

• According to classical em-theory, the energy of the light wave is distributed


uniformly over the entire wavefront.

• Difficult to understand how such uniformly distributed energy could suddenly be


concentrated on an extremely small cross-section of an electron

• Classically, if the intensity of radiation increases, the emitted electrons should have
more energy. However, the energy of the electrons were independent of the
intensity of incident em-radiation
Photoelectric effect

Explanation:

• In 1905, Einstein applied the quantum theory introduced by Plank (1902) to explain
the emission of black body radiation – quantization of energy of em-radiation into
‘packets of energy’ or photons.

• Photons collide with the electrons – particle-particle interaction: particle nature of


radiation
Photoelectric effect
• Electrons are bound inside the metal surface by the attraction of the nucleus.

• Some work is needed to free the electrons from the atomic bondage.

• The energy the electron receives from the photon is partially used in overcoming
this bondage and the excess energy appears as its kinetic energy.

1 2
ℎ𝜗 = 𝑚𝑣 + 𝑒∅ Eq (1)
2
• Where, 𝑒∅ is the energy with which the electrons are bound inside the metal
surface.
• In other words, it is minimum amount of energy required by the electrons to
escape the metal surface.
• Here, ∅ is called the work function.
Photoelectric effect
1 2+
ℎ𝜗 = 2
𝑚𝑣 𝑒∅
• ∅ is a constant for a given metal (From experimental results). Hence, the maximum
K.E. of the photo-electrons is proportional to the frequency (𝜗) of the incident light

• If the frequency (𝜗) of the incident light be gradually reduced, K.E. of the electrons
emerging from the surface of the metal will also reduce and finally become zero.

1
• At this frequency, the emerging electron will have no K.E. ( 𝑚𝑣 2 = 0). Hence, there
2
is no photocurrent

• Below this frequency, photo-emission is not possible – Quantum theory supports the
existence of a threshold frequency for each metal (ℎ𝜗 < 𝑒∅)
Photoelectric effect

Suppose ℎ𝜗 > 𝑒∅

Photoelectrons are emitted and reach


the detector

• A retarding potential is rejecting


photoelectrons from reaching the receiving
electrode.
• So it will be negative
• At some value of the retarding potential, it will
reject all photoelectrons and circuit current
will cease called the stopping potential (– Vs)
Photoelectric effect

The stopping potential (– Vs) should be


equivalent to the K.E. of the electron
1
𝑚𝑣 2 = 𝑒Vs
2
Substituting in Eq (1):

ℎ𝜗 = 𝑒Vs+ 𝑒∅
ℎ𝜗 ℎ
Vs = –∅ Slope of the graph of Vs vs 𝜗, 𝑚 =
𝑒
𝑒
Determination of Plank’s constant
Photoelectric effect:

Stopping potential for different


wavelength of light can be
determined for the same metal
surface – Your experiment

From the graph of the stopping


potential versus the frequency of
light, determine the Planks
constant from the slope of the
curve
de Broglie’s wave
The concept of light before de Broglie

• Light was thought to be electromagnetic waves which propagated according


to the Maxwell’s equations

• In 1905, Einstein showed the photoelectric effect of light – particle


behaviour

• Louis de Broglie proposed the wave equation of matter in his PhD thesis
(1924) – Nobel in 1929
De Broglie waves
Energy of an electromagnetic radiation 𝐸 = ℎ𝜈

According to mass-energy equation 𝐸 = 𝑚𝑐2

Hence, ℎ𝜈 = 𝑚𝑐2

Since particles do not travel with velocity ‘𝑐’, de Broglie replaced it with ‘𝑢’
(such that 𝑢 < 𝑐)
ℎ𝑢
Therefore, ℎ𝜈 = 𝑚𝑢2 Now, λ
= 𝑚𝑢2

ℎ𝑢
λ= 𝑚𝑢2
De Broglie wavelength: Relationship
ℎ between mass and wavelength (matter
λ=
𝑚𝑢 having wave-like properties)
De Broglie waves
ℎ 1 Smaller the mass, larger the
λ= 𝑚𝑢
implies λα 𝑚 wavelength of the matter waves

Also, 𝑚𝑢 = 𝑝 (momentum of the matter)


Hence: λ =
𝑝

• Material particles having mass 𝑚, moving with velocity 𝑢 (momentum 𝑝) can


be considered as a wave having wavelength λ.

• The wavelength associated with the particle is independent of any charge


associated with it

• The matter waves are neither mechanical or em waves. Its nature is different
and only associated with a moving particle
De Broglie wavelength of an electron
Let an electron with rest mass 𝑚𝑜 be accelerated by a potential 𝑉. If 𝑣 is the
speed of the electron then:

1
2
𝑚𝑜 𝑣 2 = 𝑒𝑉

ℎ ℎ ℎ
The de Broglie wavelength: λ = = =
𝑚𝑜 𝑣 2𝑒𝑉 2𝑒𝑉𝑚𝑜
𝑚𝑜
𝑚𝑜

If 𝑉 = 100 V

6.65 × 10−34
λ= = 1.226 𝐴ሶ
2 ×1.6×10−19 × 9.11×10−31 ×100

Although, de Broglie came up with the hypothesis, he had no actual experimental proof.
De Broglie wavelength and Bohr Atomic Model
Bohr atomic model: discrete orbits whose orbital angular momentum is equal to the
integral multiple of h/2π:

L = mvr = nh/2π, where: n = 1, 2, 3,… (Principal quantum number)


Electron remains in stationary orbits, such that: 𝑟 ∞ 𝑛2

• De Broglie suggested that electron moving around the nucleus should also be
accompanied by its matter wave

• This matter wave goes round and round, similar to standing waves

• The criterion of a standing wave is that there should be a whole number of


wavelengths in the complete cycle, so that the wave can interfere constructively
among themselves
De Broglie wavelength and Bohr Atomic Model
𝑛ℎ
From Bohr model: 𝐿 = 𝑚𝑣𝑟 =
2𝜋

2𝜋𝑚𝑣𝑟
Or 𝑛=

Then the de Broglie wavelength should be obtained by dividing the circumference


of the 𝑛𝑡ℎ orbit by the integer 𝑛

2𝜋𝑟 2𝜋𝑟 ℎ Which agrees with the de


λ= = ℎ =
𝑛 2𝜋𝑚𝑣𝑟 𝑚𝑣 Broglie hypothesis
Proof of De Broglie hypothesis – Davisson and Germer experiment

• First experimental proof for the wave nature of


material particles

• 1921, they were bombarding electrons on Nickel


polycrystal surface to study the roughness of Nickel
by electron scattering

• Electrons were bombarded at different angles on


the Nickel surface and scattering measured by
moving the detector in different directions.
Proof of De Broglie hypothesis – Davisson and Germer experiment
• In 1923 An accident occurred and air entered the
vacuum chamber which oxidised the Nickel surface.
The heated the Ni to remove the oxygen at high
temperature oven.

• They did not realise that they had converted the


polycrystalline Ni into a single crystal

• So, when they repeated the experiments,


surprisingly they got diffraction patterns.

• In 1926, Davisson listened to a lecture in Oxford by Max Born. He was surprised to see
that his diffraction pattern was used to explain some aspect of Quantum Mechanics
Proof of De Broglie hypothesis – Davisson and Germer experiment
He modified his experiment and found:

At 𝜑 = 50o
V = 54 V
K.E. of electrons = 54 eV

Diffraction pattern with highest intensity was obtained

From previous X-ray diffraction studies it was known that:

For n= 1 at 𝜑 = 50o , diffraction pattern was obtained giving the interplanar spacing if the
Nickel crystal as 0.091 nm

Hence, it was proved that just like X-rays (em-waves), electrons can also fulfil the
Bragg’s Law to produce diffraction patterns – Hence matter can behave like waves

You might also like