Binder 1
Binder 1
Binder 1
Chapter Eleven
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
DUAL NATURE OF
RADIATION AND
MATTER
no
11.1 I NTRODUCTION
386
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
particles. They were found to travel with speeds ranging from about 0.1
to 0.2 times the speed of light (3 108 m/s). The presently accepted value
of e/m is 1.76 1011 C/kg. Further, the value of e/m was found to be
independent of the nature of the material/metal used as the cathode
(emitter), or the gas introduced in the discharge tube. This observation
suggested the universality of the cathode ray particles.
Around the same time, in 1887, it was found that certain metals, when
irradiated by ultraviolet light, emitted negatively charged particles having
small speeds. Also, certain metals when heated to a high temperature were
found to emit negatively charged particles. The value of e/m of these particles
was found to be the same as that for cathode ray particles. These
observations thus established that all these particles, although produced
under different conditions, were identical in nature. J. J. Thomson, in 1897,
named these particles as electrons, and suggested that they were
fundamental, universal constituents of matter. For his epoch-making
discovery of electron, through his theoretical and experimental
investigations on conduction of electricity by gasses, he was awarded the
Nobel Prize in Physics in 1906. In 1913, the American physicist R. A.
Millikan (1868-1953) performed the pioneering oil-drop experiment for
the precise measurement of the charge on an electron. He found that the
charge on an oil-droplet was always an integral multiple of an elementary
charge, 1.602 10 19 C. Millikans experiment established that electric
charge is quantised. From the values of charge (e ) and specific charge
(e/m ), the mass (m) of the electron could be determined.
no
We know that metals have free electrons (negatively charged particles) that
are responsible for their conductivity. However, the free electrons cannot
normally escape out of the metal surface. If an electron attempts to come
out of the metal, the metal surface acquires a positive charge and pulls the
electron back to the metal. The free electron is thus held inside the metal
surface by the attractive forces of the ions. Consequently, the electron can
come out of the metal surface only if it has got sufficient energy to overcome
the attractive pull. A certain minimum amount of energy is required to be
given to an electron to pull it out from the surface of the metal. This
minimum energy required by an electron to escape from the metal surface
is called the work function of the metal. It is generally denoted by 0 and
measured in eV (electron volt). One electron volt is the energy gained by an
electron when it has been accelerated by a potential difference of 1 volt, so
that 1 eV = 1.602 10 19 J.
This unit of energy is commonly used in atomic and nuclear physics.
The work function ( 0 ) depends on the properties of the metal and the
nature of its surface. The values of work function of some metals are
given in Table 11.1. These values are approximate as they are very
sensitive to surface impurities.
Note from Table 11.1 that the work function of platinum is the highest
(0 = 5.65 eV ) while it is the lowest ( 0 = 2.14 eV) for caesium.
The minimum energy required for the electron emission from the metal
surface can be supplied to the free electrons by any one of the following
physical processes:
387
Physics
TABLE 11.1 WORK FUNCTIONS OF
SOME METALS
Work function
(eV)
Metal
Work function
(eV)
Cs
2.14
Al
4.28
2.30
Hg
4.49
Na
2.75
Cu
4.65
Ca
3.20
Ag
4.70
Mo
4.17
Ni
5.15
Pb
4.25
Pt
5.65
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
Metal
no
388
OF
http://www.kcvs.ca/site/projects/physics.html
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
P HOTOELECTRIC
no
Figure 11.1 depicts a schematic view of the arrangement used for the
experimental study of the photoelectric effect. It consists of an evacuated
glass/quartz tube having a photosensitive plate C and another metal
plate A. Monochromatic light from the source S of sufficiently short
wavelength passes through the window W and falls on the photosensitive
plate C (emitter). A transparent quartz window is sealed on to the glass
tube, which permits ultraviolet radiation to pass through it and irradiate
the photosensitive plate C. The electrons are emitted by the plate C and
are collected by the plate A (collector), by the electric field created by the
battery. The battery maintains the potential difference between the plates
C and A, that can be varied. The polarity of the plates C and A can be
reversed by a commutator. Thus, the plate A can be maintained at a desired
positive or negative potential with respect to emitter C. When the collector
plate A is positive with respect to the emitter plate C, the electrons are
389
Physics
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
no
390
We first keep the plate A at some positive accelerating potential with respect
to the plate C and illuminate the plate C with light of fixed frequency
and fixed intensity I1. We next vary the positive potential of plate A gradually
and measure the resulting photocurrent each time. It is found that the
photoelectric current increases with increase in accelerating (positive)
potential. At some stage, for a certain positive potential of plate A, all the
emitted electrons are collected by the plate A and the photoelectric current
becomes maximum or saturates. If we increase the accelerating potential
of plate A further, the photocurrent does not increase. This maximum
value of the photoelectric current is called saturation current. Saturation
current corresponds to the case when all the photoelectrons emitted by
the emitter plate C reach the collector plate A.
We now apply a negative (retarding) potential to the plate A with respect
to the plate C and make it increasingly negative gradually. When the
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
(11.1)
We can now repeat this experiment with incident radiation of the same
frequency but of higher intensity I2 and I3 (I3 > I2 > I 1). We note that the
saturation currents are now found to be at higher values. This shows
that more electrons are being emitted per second, proportional to the
intensity of incident radiation. But the stopping potential remains the
same as that for the incident radiation of intensity I1, as shown graphically
in Fig. 11.3. Thus, for a given frequency of the incident radiation, the
stopping potential is independent of its intensity. In other words, the
maximum kinetic energy of photoelectrons depends on the light source
and the emitter plate material, but is independent of intensity of incident
radiation.
no
391
Physics
no
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
AND
WAVE T HEORY
no
The wave nature of light was well established by the end of the nineteenth
century. The phenomena of interference, diffraction and polarisation were
explained in a natural and satisfactory way by the wave picture of light.
According to this picture, light is an electromagnetic wave consisting of
electric and magnetic fields with continuous distribution of energy over
the region of space over which the wave is extended. Let us now see if this
wave picture of light can explain the observations on photoelectric
emission given in the previous section.
According to the wave picture of light, the free electrons at the surface
of the metal (over which the beam of radiation falls) absorb the radiant
energy continuously. The greater the intensity of radiation, the greater are
the amplitude of electric and magnetic fields. Consequently, the greater
the intensity, the greater should be the energy absorbed by each electron.
In this picture, the maximum kinetic energy of the photoelectrons on the
surface is then expected to increase with increase in intensity. Also, no
matter what the frequency of radiation is, a sufficiently intense beam of
radiation (over sufficient time) should be able to impart enough energy to
the electrons, so that they exceed the minimum energy needed to escape
from the metal surface . A threshold frequency, therefore, should not exist.
These expectations of the wave theory directly contradict observations (i),
(ii) and (iii) given at the end of sub-section 11.4.3.
Further, we should note that in the wave picture, the absorption of
energy by electron takes place continuously over the entire
wavefront of the radiation. Since a large number of electrons absorb energy,
the energy absorbed per electron per unit time turns out to be small.
Explicit calculations estimate that it can take hours or more for a single
electron to pick up sufficient energy to overcome the work function and
come out of the metal. This conclusion is again in striking contrast to
observation (iv) that the photoelectric emission is instantaneous. In short,
the wave picture is unable to explain the most basic features of
photoelectric emission.
393
Physics
no
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
394
0 =
(11.3)
h
Equation (11.3) shows that the greater the work
function 0, the higher the minimum or threshold
frequency 0 needed to emit photoelectrons. Thus,
there exists a threshold frequency0 (= 0 /h) for the
metal surface, below which no photoelectric emission
is possible, no matter how intense the incident
radiation may be or how long it falls on the surface.
In this picture, intensity of radiation as noted above,
is proportional to the number of energy quanta per
unit area per unit time. The greater the number of
energy quanta available, the greater is the number of
electrons absorbing the energy quanta and greater,
therefore, is the number of electrons coming out of
the metal (for > 0 ). This explains why, for > 0 ,
photoelectric current is proportional to intensity.
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
e V 0 = h 0; for 0
0
(11.4)
e
e
This is an important result. It predicts that the V0 versus curve is a
straight line with slope = (h/e), independent of the nature of the material.
During 1906-1916, Millikan performed a series of experiments on
photoelectric effect, aimed at disproving Einsteins photoelectric equation.
He measured the slope of the straight line obtained for sodium, similar to
that shown in Fig. 11.5. Using the known value of e, he determined the
value of Plancks constant h . This value was close to the value of Plancks
contant (= 6.626 1034J s) determined in an entirely different context.
In this way, in 1916, Millikan proved the validity of Einsteins photoelectric
equation, instead of disproving it.
The successful explanation of photoelectric effect using the hypothesis
of light quanta and the experimental determination of values of h and 0 ,
in agreement with values obtained from other experiments, led to the
acceptance of Einsteins picture of photoelectric effect. Millikan verified
photoelectric equation with great precision, for a number of alkali metals
over a wide range of radiation frequencies.
or V0 =
OF
no
Photoelectric effect thus gave evidence to the strange fact that light in
interaction with matter behaved as if it was made of quanta or packets of
energy, each of energy h .
Is the light quantum of energy to be associated with a particle? Einstein
arrived at the important result, that the light quantum can also be
associated with momentum (h /c). A definite value of energy as well as
momentum is a strong sign that the light quantum can be associated
with a particle. This particle was later named photon. The particle-like
behaviour of light was further confirmed, in 1924, by the experiment of
A.H. Compton (1892-1962) on scattering of X-rays from electrons. In
1921, Einstein was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics for his contribution
to theoretical physics and the photoelectric effect. In 1923, Millikan was
awarded the Nobel Prize in physics for his work on the elementary
charge of electricity and on the photoelectric effect.
We can summarise the photon picture of electromagnetic radiation
as follows:
395
Physics
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
EXAMPLE 11.1
Solution
(a) Each photon has an energy
34
14
E = h = ( 6.63 10 J s) (6.0 10 Hz)
19
= 3.98 10 J
(b) If N is the number of photons emitted by the source per second,
the power P transmitted in the beam equals N times the energy
per photon E, so that P = N E. Then
N=
P 2.0 103 W
=
19
E 3.98 10 J
15
= 5.0 10
Example 11.2 The work function of caesium is 2.14 eV. Find (a) the
threshold frequency for caesium, and (b) the wavelength of the incident
light if the photocurrent is brought to zero by a stopping potential of
0.60 V.
396
0 = 0 =
h
EXAMPLE 11.2
no
Solution
(a) For the cut-off or threshold frequency, the energy h 0 of the incident
radiation must be equal to work function 0, so that
2.14eV
6.63 10 34 J s
2.14 1.6 10 19 J
= 5.16 1014 Hz
6.63 10 34 J s
hc
= hc/(eV0 + 0 )
=
19.89 1026 J m
(2.74 eV)
19.89 1026 J m
= 454 nm
2.74 1.6 10 19 J
EXAMPLE 11.2
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
or,
1.989 10 25 J m
no
EXAMPLE 11.3
397
Physics
11.8 W AVE NATURE
OF
MATTER
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
h
h
=
p
mv
(11.5)
where m is the mass of the particle and v its speed. Equation (11.5) is
known as the de Broglie relation and the wavelength of the matter
wave is called de Broglie wavelength. The dual aspect of matter is evident
in the de Broglie relation. On the left hand side of Eq. (11.5), is the
attribute of a wave while on the right hand side the momentum p is a
typical attribute of a particle. Plancks constant h relates the two
attributes.
Equation (11.5) for a material particle is basically a hypothesis whose
validity can be tested only by experiment. However, it is interesting to see
that it is satisfied also by a photon. For a photon, as we have seen,
p = h /c
(11.6)
no
Therefore,
398
h c
= =
(11.7)
p
That is, the de Broglie wavelength of a photon given by Eq. (11.5) equals
the wavelength of electromagnetic radiation of which the photon is a
quantum of energy and momentum.
Clearly, from Eq. (11.5 ), is smaller for a heavier particle ( large m ) or
more energetic particle (large v). For example, the de Broglie wavelength
of a ball of mass 0.12 kg moving with a speed of 20 m s 1 is easily
calculated:
no
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
p = m v = 0.12 kg 20 m s1 = 2.40 kg m s1
6.63 10 34 J s
h
=
= 2.76 1034 m
2.40 kg m s 1
p
399
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
Physics
K =e V
Now, K =
no
400
p=
(11.8)
1
p2
m v2 =
, so that
2
2m
2m K =
2 m eV
(11.9)
h
h
h
=
=
p
2mK
2 m eV
(11.10)
nm
(11.11)
V
where V is the magnitude of accelerating potential in
volts. For a 120 V accelerating potential, Eq. (11.11) gives
= 0.112 nm. This wavelength is of the same order as
the spacing between the atomic planes in crystals. This
suggests that matter waves associated with an electron could be verified
by crystal diffraction experiments analogous to X-ray diffraction. We
describe the experimental verification of the de Broglie hypothesis in the
next section. In 1929, de Broglie was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics
for his discovery of the wave nature of electrons.
The matterwave picture elegantly incorporated the Heisenbergs
uncertainty principle. According to the principle, it is not possible to
measure both the position and momentum of an electron (or any other
particle) at the same time exactly. There is always some uncertainty ( x )
in the specification of position and some uncertainty (p ) in the
specification of momentum. The product of x and p is of the order of *
(with = h/2), i.e.,
x p
(11.12)
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
no
Solution
(a) For the electron:
31
6
Mass m = 9.1110 kg, speed v = 5.410 m/s. Then, momentum
31
6
p = m v = 9.1110 (kg) 5.4 10 (m/s)
24
p = 4.92 10 kg m/s
de Broglie wavelength, = h/p
6.63 1034 J s
24
4. 92 10 kg m/s
= 0.135 nm
=
EXAMPLE 11.4
401
6. 63 1034 J s
4. 50 kg m/s
34
= 1.47 10 m
The de Broglie wavelength of electron is comparable with X-ray
19
wavelengths. However, for the ball it is about 10
times the size of
the proton, quite beyond experimental measurement.
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
EXAMPLE 11.4
Physics
EXAMPLE 11.5
Solution
For a particle, de Broglie wavelength, = h/p
2
Kinetic energy, K = p /2m
Then, = h / 2mK
For the same kinetic energy K, the de Broglie wavelength associated
with the particle is inversely proportional to the square root of their
masses. A proton
1
1
an -particle 2
Hence, particle has the shortest de Broglie wavelength.
P ROBABILITY
402
EXAMPLE 11.6
no
It is worth pausing here to reflect on just what a matter wave associated with a particle,
say, an electron, means. Actually, a truly satisfactory physical understanding of the
dual nature of matter and radiation has not emerged so far. The great founders of
quantum mechanics (Niels Bohr, Albert Einstein, and many others) struggled with this
and related concepts for long. Still the deep physical interpretation of quantum
mechanics continues to be an area of active research. Despite this, the concept of
matter wave has been mathematically introduced in modern quantum mechanics with
great success. An important milestone in this connection was when Max Born (18821970) suggested a probability interpretation to the matter wave amplitude. According
to this, the intensity (square of the amplitude) of the matter wave at a point determines
the probability density of the particle at that point. Probability density means probability
per unit volume. Thus, if A is the amplitude of the wave at a point, |A| 2 V is the
probability of the particle being found in a small volume V around that point. Thus,
if the intensity of matter wave is large in a certain region, there is a greater probability
of the particle being found there than where the intensity is small.
h h
=
p mv
ve
v
EXAMPLE 11.6
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
Mass, m = h/v
For an electron, mass m e = h/e ve
Now, we have v/ve = 3 and
/ e = 1.813 10 4
1.227
nm = 0.123 nm
100
The de Broglie wavelength associated with an electron in this case is of
the order of X-ray wavelengths.
=
11.9 DAVISSON
AND
EXAMPLE 11.7
= h /p =
GERMER EXPERIMENT
no
403
no
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1986/presentation-speech.html
Physics
404
= h /p =
1 .227
54
1 .227
V
nm
nm = 0.167 nm
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
The classical wave theory could not explain the main features of
photoelectric effect. Its picture of continuous absorption of energy from
radiation could not explain the independence of Kmax on intensity, the
existence of o and the instantaneous nature of the process. Einstein
explained these features on the basis of photon picture of light.
According to this, light is composed of discrete packets of energy called
quanta or photons. Each photon carries an energy E (= h ) and
momentum p (= h/), which depend on the frequency ( ) of incident
light and not on its intensity. Photoelectric emission from the metal
surface occurs due to absorption of a photon by an electron.
7.
no
1
m v2max = V0 e = h 0 = h ( 0 )
2
8.
405
Physics
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
Physical
Quantity
Symbol
Dimensions
Unit
Remarks
Plancks
constant
[ML2 T 1 ]
Js
E = h
Stopping
potential
V0
[ML 2 T 3A 1]
e V 0= Kmax
Work
function
[ML2 T 2 ]
J ; eV
Kmax = E 0
Threshold
frequency
[T 1]
Hz
0 = 0 /h
de Broglie
wavelength
[L]
= h/p
POINTS TO PONDER
1.
no
2.
406
3.
Free electrons in a metal are free in the sense that they move inside the
metal in a constant potential (This is only an approximation). They are
not free to move out of the metal. They need additional energy to get
out of the metal.
Free electrons in a metal do not all have the same energy. Like molecules
in a gas jar, the electrons have a certain energy distribution at a given
temperature. This distribution is different from the usual Maxwells
distribution that you have learnt in the study of kinetic theory of gases.
You will lear n about it in later courses, but the difference has to do
with the fact that electrons obey Paulis exclusion principle.
Because of the energy distribution of free electrons in a metal, the
energy required by an electron to come out of the metal is different for
different electrons. Electrons with higher energy require less additional
energy to come out of the metal than those with lower energies. Work
function is the least energy required by an electron to come out of the
metal.
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
5.
Observations on photoelectric ef fect imply that in the event of matterlight interaction, absorption of energy takes place in discrete units of h .
This is not quite the same as saying that light consists of particles,
each of energy h .
Observations on the stopping potential (its independence of intensity
and dependence on frequency) are the crucial discriminator between
the wave-picture and photon-picture of photoelectric effect.
6.
h
has physical
p
significance; its phase velocity vp has no physical significance. However,
the group velocity of the matter wave is physically meaningful and
equals the velocity of the particle.
The wavelength of a matter wave given by =
EXERCISES
11.1
11.2
Find the
(a) maximum frequency, and
(b) minimum wavelength of X-rays produced by 30 kV electrons.
The work function of caesium metal is 2.14 eV. When light of
frequency 6 1014Hz is incident on the metal surface, photoemission
of electrons occurs. What is the
(a) maximum kinetic energy of the emitted electrons,
(b) Stopping potential, and
(c) maximum speed of the emitted photoelectrons?
11.3
11.4
(c) How fast does a hydrogen atom have to travel in order to have
the same momentum as that of the photon?
The energy flux of sunlight reaching the surface of the earth is
3
2
1.388 10 W/m . How many photons (nearly) per square metre are
incident on the Earth per second ? Assume that the photons in the
sunlight have an average wavelength of 550 nm.
no
11.5
11.6
11.7
407
Physics
with the sodium light? (b) At what rate are the photons delivered to
the sphere?
The threshold frequency for a certain metal is 3.3 10 14 Hz. If light
of frequency 8.2 1014 Hz is incident on the metal, predict the cutoff voltage for the photoelectric emission.
11.9 The work function for a certain metal is 4.2 eV. Will this metal give
photoelectric emission for incident radiation of wavelength 330 nm?
11.10 Light of frequency 7.21 10 14 Hz is incident on a metal surface.
5
Electrons with a maximum speed of 6.0 10 m/s are ejected from
the surface. What is the threshold frequency for photoemission of
electrons?
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
11.8
no
11.16 An
(a)
(b)
(c)
408
11.17 (a) For what kinetic energy of a neutron will the associated de Broglie
wavelength be 1.40 10 10 m?
(b) Also find the de Broglie wavelength of a neutron, in thermal
equilibrium with matter, having an average kinetic energy of
(3/2) k T at 300 K.
11.18 Show that the wavelength of electromagnetic radiation is equal to
the de Broglie wavelength of its quantum (photon).
11.19 What is the de Broglie wavelength of a nitrogen molecule in air at
300 K ? Assume that the molecule is moving with the root-meansquare speed of molecules at this temperature. (Atomic mass of
nitrogen = 14.0076 u)
ADDITIONAL EXERCISES
no
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
11.20 (a) Estimate the speed with which electrons emitted from a heated
emitter of an evacuated tube impinge on the collector maintained
at a potential difference of 500 V with respect to the emitter.
Ignore the small initial speeds of the electrons. The
specific charge of the electron, i.e., its e/m is given to be
11
1
1.76 10 C kg .
(b) Use the same formula you employ in (a) to obtain electron speed
for an collector potential of 10 MV. Do you see what is wrong ? In
what way is the formula to be modified ?
11.21 (a) A monoenergetic electron beam with electron speed of
5.20 106 m s1 is subject to a magnetic field of 1.30 104 T
normal to the beam velocity. What is the radius of the circle traced
by the beam, given e/m for electron equals 1.76 1011C kg1.
(b) Is the formula you employ in (a) valid for calculating radius of
the path of a 20 MeV electron beam? If not, in what way is it
modified ?
[Note: Exercises 11.20(b) and 11.21(b) take you to relativistic
mechanics which is beyond the scope of this book. They have been
inserted here simply to emphasise the point that the formulas you
use in part (a) of the exercises are not valid at very high speeds or
energies. See answers at the end to know what very high speed or
energy means.]
11.22 An electron gun with its collector at a potential of 100 V fires out
electrons in a spherical bulb containing hydrogen gas at low
pressure (102 mm of Hg). A magnetic field of 2.83 10 4 T curves
the path of the electrons in a circular orbit of radius 12.0 cm. (The
path can be viewed because the gas ions in the path focus the beam
by attracting electrons, and emitting light by electron capture; this
method is known as the fine beam tube method.) Determine
e/m from the data.
11.23 (a) An X-ray tube produces a continuous spectrum of radiation with
its short wavelength end at 0.45 . What is the maximum energy
of a photon in the radiation?
(b) From your answer to (a), guess what order of accelerating voltage
(for electrons) is required in such a tube ?
11.24 In an accelerator experiment on high-energy collisions of electrons
with positrons, a certain event is interpreted as annihilation of an
electron-positron pair of total energy 10.2 BeV into two -rays of
equal energy. What is the wavelength associated with each -ray?
9
(1BeV = 10 eV)
11.25 Estimating the following two numbers should be interesting. The
first number will tell you why radio engineers do not need to worry
much about photons! The second number tells you why our eye can
never count photons, even in barely detectable light.
(a) The number of photons emitted per second by a Medium wave
transmitter of 10 kW power, emitting radiowaves of wavelength
500 m.
(b) The number of photons entering the pupil of our eye per second
corresponding to the minimum intensity of white light that we
409
Physics
humans can perceive (1010 W m 2). Take the area of the pupil
to be about 0.4 cm2, and the average frequency of white light to
be about 6 1014 Hz.
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
no
410
Na: 2.75 eV; K: 2.30 eV; Mo: 4.17 eV; Ni: 5.15 eV. Which of these
metals will not give photoelectric emission for a radiation of
wavelength 3300 from a He-Cd laser placed 1 m away from the
photocell? What happens if the laser is brought nearer and placed
50 cm away ?
11.30 Light of intensity 105 W m2 falls on a sodium photo-cell of surface
2
area 2 cm . Assuming that the top 5 layers of sodium absorb the
incident energy, estimate time required for photoelectric emission
in the wave-picture of radiation. The work function for the metal is
given to be about 2 eV. What is the implication of your answer?
11.31 Crystal diffraction experiments can be performed using X-rays, or
electrons accelerated through appropriate voltage. Which probe has
greater energy? (For quantitative comparison, take the wavelength
of the pr obe equal to 1 , which is of the order of inter -atomic spacing
31
in the lattice) (m e=9.11 10
kg).
11.32 (a) Obtain the de Broglie wavelength of a neutron of kinetic energy
150 eV. As you have seen in Exer cise 11.31, an electron beam of
this ener gy is suitable for crystal diffraction experiments. Would
a neutron beam of the same energy be equally suitable ? Explain.
27
(m n = 1.675 10 kg)
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
11.33
11.34
11.35
11.36
no
[Note: Exercises 11.35 and 11.36 reveal that while the wave-packets
associated with gaseous molecules under ordinary conditions are
non-overlapping, the electron wave-packets in a metal strongly
overlap with one another. This suggests that whereas molecules in
an ordinary gas can be distinguished apart, electrons in a metal
cannot be distintguished apart from one another. This
indistinguishibility has many fundamental implications which you
will explore in more advanced Physics courses.]
11.37 Answer the following questions:
(a) Quarks inside protons and neutrons are thought to carry
fractional charges [(+2/3)e ; (1/3)e]. Why do they not show up
in Millikans oil-drop experiment ?
(b) What is so special about the combination e/m ? Why do we not
simply talk of e and m separately?
(c) Why should gases be insulators at ordinary pressures and start
conducting at very low pressures ?
(d) Every metal has a definite work function. Why do all
photoelectrons not come out with the same energy if incident
radiation is monochromatic? Why is there an energy distribution
of photoelectrons ?
(e) The energy and momentum of an electron are related to the
frequency and wavelength of the associated matter wave by the
relations:
E = h , p =
411
Physics
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
APPENDIX
no
What is light? This question has haunted mankind for a long time. But systematic experiments were done by
scientists since the dawn of the scientific and industrial era, about four centuries ago. Around the same time,
theoretical models about what light is made of were developed. While building a model in any branch of
science, it is essential to see that it is able to explain all the experimental observations existing at that time.
It is therefore appropriate to summarize some observations about light that were known in the seventeenth
century.
The properties of light known at that time included (a) rectilinear propagation of light, (b) reflection from
plane and curved surfaces, (c) refraction at the boundary of two media, (d) dispersion into various colours, (e)
high speed. Appropriate laws were formulated for the first four phenomena. For example, Snell formulated his
laws of refraction in 1621. Several scientists right from the days of Galileo had tried to measure the speed of
light. But they had not been able to do so. They had only concluded that it was higher than the limit of their
measurement.
Two models of light were also proposed in the seventeenth century. Descartes, in early decades of seventeenth
century, proposed that light consists of particles, while Huygens, around 1650-60, proposed that light consists
of waves. Descartes proposal was merely a philosophical model, devoid of any experiments or scientific
ar guments. Newton soon after, ar ound 1660-70, extended Descartes particle model, known as corpuscular
theory , built it up as a scientific theory, and explained various known properties with it. These models, light
as waves and as particles, in a sense, are quite opposite of each other. But both models could explain all the
known properties of light. There was nothing to choose between them.
The history of the development of these models over the next few centuries is interesting. Bartholinus, in
1669, discovered double refraction of light in some crystals, and Huygens, in 1678, was quick to explain it on
the basis of his wave theory of light. In spite of this, for over one hundred years, Newtons particle model was
firmly believed and preferred over the wave model. This was partly because of its simplicity and partly because
of Newtons influence on contemporary physics.
Then in 1801, Young performed his double-slit experiment and observed interference fringes. This
phenomenon could be explained only by wave theory. It was realized that diffraction was also another
phenomenon which could be explained only by wave theory. In fact, it was a natural consequence of Huygens
idea of secondary wavelets emanating from every point in the path of light. These experiments could not be
explained by assuming that light consists of particles. Another phenomenon of polarisation was discovered
around 1810, and this too could be naturally explained by the wave theory. Thus wave theory of Huygens
came to the forefront and Newtons particle theory went into the background. This situation again continued
for almost a century.
Better experiments were performed in the nineteenth century to determine the speed of light. With more
accurate experiments, a value of 3108 m/s for speed of light in vacuum was arrived at. Around 1860, Maxwell
proposed his equations of electromagnetism and it was realized that all electromagnetic phenomena known at
that time could be explained by Maxwells four equations. Soon Maxwell showed that electric and magnetic
fields could propagate through empty space (vacuum) in the form of electromagnetic waves. He calculated the
speed of these waves and arrived at a theoretical value of 2.998108 m/s. The close agreement of this value
with the experimental value suggested that light consists of electromagnetic waves. In 1887 Hertz demonstrated
the generation and detection of such waves. This established the wave theory of light on a firm footing. We
might say that while eighteenth century belonged to the particle model, the nineteenth century belonged to
the wave model of light.
Vast amounts of experiments were done during the period 1850-1900 on heat and related phenomena, an
altogether different area of physics. Theories and models like kinetic theory and thermodynamics were developed
which quite successfully explained the various phenomena, except one.
412
no
tt
o N
be C
E
re R
pu T
bl
is
he
d
Every body at any temperature emits radiation of all wavelengths. It also absorbs radiation falling on it.
A body which absorbs all the radiation falling on it is called a black body. It is an ideal concept in physics, like
concepts of a point mass or uniform motion. A graph of the intensity of radiation emitted by a body versus
wavelength is called the black body spectrum. No theory in those days could explain the complete black body
spectrum!
In 1900, Planck hit upon a novel idea. If we assume, he said, that radiation is emitted in packets of energy
instead of continuously as in a wave, then we can explain the black body spectrum. Planck himself regarded
these quanta, or packets, as a property of emission and absorption, rather than that of light. He derived a
formula which agreed with the entire spectrum. This was a confusing mixture of wave and particle pictures
radiation is emitted as a particle, it travels as a wave, and is again absorbed as a particle! Moreover, this put
physicists in a dilemma. Should we again accept the particle picture of light just to explain one phenomenon?
Then what happens to the phenomena of interference and diffraction which cannot be explained by the
particle model?
But soon in 1905, Einstein explained the photoelectric effect by assuming the particle picture of light.
In 1907, Debye explained the low temperature specific heats of solids by using the particle picture for lattice
vibrations in a crystalline solid. Both these phenomena belonging to widely diverse areas of physics could be
explained only by the particle model and not by the wave model. In 1923, Comptons x-ray scattering experiments
from atoms also went in favour of the particle pictur e. This increased the dilemma further.
Thus by 1923, physicists faced with the following situation. (a) There were some phenomena like rectilinear
propagation, reflection, refraction, which could be explained by either particle model or by wave model. (b)
There were some phenomena such as diffraction and interference which could be explained only by the wave
model but not by the particle model. (c) There were some phenomena such as black body radiation, photoelectric
effect, and Compton scattering which could be explained only by the particle model but not by the wave model.
Somebody in those days aptly remarked that light behaves as a particle on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays,
and as a wave on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays, and we dont talk of light on Sundays!
In 1924, de Broglie proposed his theory of wave-particle duality in which he said that not only photons
of light but also particles of matter such as electrons and atoms possess a dual character, sometimes
behaving like a particle and sometimes as a wave. He gave a formula connecting their mass, velocity, momentum
(particle characteristics), with their wavelength and frequency (wave characteristics)! In 1927 Thomson, and
Davisson and Germer, in separate experiments, showed that electrons did behave like waves with a wavelength
which agreed with that given by de Broglies formula. Their experiment was on diffraction of electrons through
crystalline solids, in which the regular arrangement of atoms acted like a grating. Very soon, diffraction
experiments with other particles such as neutrons and protons were performed and these too confirmed with
de Broglies formula. This confirmed wave-particle duality as an established principle of physics. Here was a
principle, physicists thought, which explained all the phenomena mentioned above not only for light but also
for the so-called particles.
But there was no basic theoretical foundation for wave-particle duality. De Broglies proposal was
merely a qualitative argument based on symmetry of nature. Wave-particle duality was at best a principle, not
an outcome of a sound fundamental theory. It is true that all experiments whatever agreed with de Broglie
formula. But physics does not work that way. On the one hand, it needs experimental confirmation, while on
the other hand, it also needs sound theoretical basis for the models proposed. This was developed over the
next two decades. Dirac developed his theory of radiation in about 1928, and Heisenberg and Pauli gave it a
firm footing by 1930. T omonaga, Schwinger, and Feynman, in late 1940s, produced further refinements and
cleared the theory of inconsistencies which were noticed. All these theories mainly put wave-particle duality
on a theoretical footing.
Although the story continues, it grows more and more complex and beyond the scope of this note. But
we have here the essential structure of what happened, and let us be satisfied with it at the moment. Now it
is regarded as a natural consequence of present theories of physics that electromagnetic radiation as well as
particles of matter exhibit both wave and particle properties in different experiments, and sometimes even in
the different parts of the same experiment.
413
According to quantum theory of light, radiation from any given source always travel
in the form of photons.
hc
The energy of photon is given by E h
iv.
The mass of the particle varies with velocity according to the relation
m0
. Where m0 is the rest mass of photon. As photon moves with the
m
1 c2 / v2
v.
vi.
velocity of light v=c, thus m0=0. Hence photon has zero rest mass.
h h
Momentum of photon is given by relation,
p mc
Photons are electrically neutral particle and they are not deflected by the either
electric or magnetic field.
vii.
viii.
1 eV = 1.6 x 10-19 J
Free electrons in metals: In metals, the electrons in the outermost shell of the atoms are
loosely bound. It is because of the small attractive force between the positive nucleus and
electrons in the outermost shell. These electrons can freely move in a metal like gas
molecules in a given volume of certain gas. But the electron cant leave the metal surface
because of the attractive force of other positive charges. There exists a potential barrier
which they must overcome before leaving the surface. To overcome that potential barrier
they require certain minimum amount of energy. This minimum energy required by an
electron just to escape from the metal surface so as to overcome the restraining forces is
called work function. Work function is generally denoted by 0.
Electron Emission: Electron emission is defined as the phenomenon of emission of free
electrons from the metal surface. The various modes for providing energy to the electrons
and making them free are
[a] Thermionic emission: It is phenomenon of emission of free electrons from the metal
surface when heated suitably. On heating the metal, the free electrons acquire sufficient
1|Page
2|Page
1
1
2
2
or
V0 mvmax
mvmax
2
2
Thus, the stopping potential gives the estimate of the maximum kinetic energy of
photoelectrons.
eV0
3|Page
4|Page
According to wave theory, the energy carried by waves depends upon the intensity
and increases with the increase in intensity. The light waves with larger intensity will
provide more energy to electrons of metal; consequently the energy of electrons will
increase.
But according to experimental observations, the kinetic energy of photoelectrons does
not depend on the intensity of incident light.
(ii)
According to wave theory the light of any frequency can emit electrons from metallic
surface provided the intensity of light be sufficient to provide necessary energy for
emission of electrons, but according to experimental observations the light of
frequency less than threshold frequency can not emit electrons; whatever the
intensity of incident light may be.
(iii)
According to wave theory the energy transferred by light waves will not go to a
particular electron, but it will be distributed uniformly to all electrons present in the
illuminated surface. Therefore electrons will take some time to collect the necessary
energy for their emission. But experimental observations show that the emission of
electrons take place instantaneously after the light is incident on the metal; whatever
the intensity of light may be.
h W
1
2
mvmax
2
or
1
2
mvmax
h W
2
Here, m is the mass of electron and v max is the maximum velocity of the photoelectrons. (In
fact, most of the electrons possess kinetic energy less than the maximum value as they
lose a part of their kinetic energy due to collisions in escaping from the metal).
If = 0, then K.E. =0.
0 h 0 W W h 0
5|Page
1
2
mvmax
h ( 0 ) (1)
2
1
2
mvmax
eV0
2
eV0 h ( 0 )
h
W
or V0
e
e
So
V0
V0
-V0
-W/e
So
Kmax
K max
Comparing with y mx C
o
6|Page
-W
ii.
The phenomenon like diffraction or polarization, which can be, explained only
using wave character.
iii.
De-Broglie Hypothesis {Matter Waves}De-Broglie stated that as light possesses dual character and universe consists of matter
and radiation only. As nature loves symmetry, thus matter should also possess dual nature
both particle as well as a wave. According to de-Broglie a wave is always associated with
the moving particle which controls the particle in every aspect. This wave is called deBroglie wave or matter wave.
For a particle of mass m moving with the velocity v the de-Broglie wavelength
associated with the particle is given by
h
mv
Proof: According to Planks quantum theory, the energy associated with a photon of
frequency is given by
E h
Also, according to relativistic mass formula for particle of rest mass m0 and momentum
p the energy is given by-
p 2 c 2 m02 c 4
h pc
8|Page
or
h h
or
c
h
p
h
mv
p mv
Thus, if the velocity of the particle is zero, its wavelength will be infinity and if velocity of
the particle is infinity then wavelength will be zero.
Note:
In daily life the mass of the particle very large. Thus the de-Broglie wavelength
comes out to be very small.
The de-Broglie wavelength of any particle is independent of the charge on the
particle.
It was found that velocity of De-Broglie waves is always more than the velocity with
which the particle moves.
De-Broglie wavelength of an accelerated electronIf an electron is made to accelerate through the potential difference of V volt, then electrical
potential energy of the electron gets converted into its kinetic energy i.e.
Kinetic Energy of electron, K eV
Also
p2
2m
or p 2mK
p 2meV
Or
6.63 10 34
2 9.1 10 31 1.6 10 19
or
12.27
3
k BT , Where kB is the Boltzmanns constant
2
de-Broglie wavelength
9|Page
1
mv 2
2
3
2 mK ) 2 m k BT 3mk BT
2
h
h
3mk BT
DAVISSON AND GERMERS EXPERIMENT (ELECTRON DIFFRACTION): Davisson and Germer gave the experimental demonstration of the de-Broglie wave
associated with the moving electron i.e. it establish the wave nature of matter.
EXPERIMENTAL SET-UP: It consists of an electron
gun. A fine beam of electron accelerated to a known
energy strikes to a Ni- crystal.
Electron Gun
Detector
Scattered
Beam
Ni Crystal
I
54V
180
or
500
1
180
2
2d sin n
For 1st order diffraction, n = 1 and inter atomic separation for Ni- crystal, d = 0.91 A
= 2 0.91 sin65
or
= 1.65A
Now according to de-Broglie hypothesis- The wavelength of wave associated with electron
accelerated to 54 volt is given by-
12.27
V
12.27
54
1.66 A