GR9677 #40
|
|
|
Alternate Solutions |
BerkeleyEric 2010-09-22 22:36:21 | I think process of elimination is fastest here. From the Bohr formula we know that the n=1 is at 4*(-13.6 eV) ~ -52 eV. So it can't be (D). And it also can't be (B) since the n=2 state wouldn't be all the way up at -6 eV.
Now remember that 470 nm falls in the visible regime, so the energy difference must be at around 1-2 eV. This immediately eliminates (C) and (E) since they must be more than this amount lower than the n=4 state. | data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2dbb0/2dbb0a6359f9a33822a5b44305261c318eb3541b" alt="Alternate Solution - Unverified" | archard 2010-07-15 13:50:25 | You can also get it with the Rydberg formula, since you're given the wavelength of the photon and the initial energy level. Then it's just plug and chug. | data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2dbb0/2dbb0a6359f9a33822a5b44305261c318eb3541b" alt="Alternate Solution - Unverified" |
|
Comments |
cczako 2013-10-18 15:21:38 | The way I did was to just remember that E is proportional to Z^2/n^2. Its quick and easy to calculate that n=4 --> E=- 3 eV, n=3 --> E=-6 eV, n=2 --> E=-13.6 eV, and n=1 --> E=-50 eV. This automatically eliminates B and D. Then using the equation E=(hc)/lambda (I always use 1240 nm*eV for hc) you get that 470 nm is about 3 eV. So n=4 of energy -3 eV minus 3 eV gives you -6 eV. This gives you choice A. | data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/44870/44870523a04b283b965cd8ae9c7ca868d7c42985" alt="NEC" | BerkeleyEric 2010-09-22 22:36:21 | I think process of elimination is fastest here. From the Bohr formula we know that the n=1 is at 4*(-13.6 eV) ~ -52 eV. So it can't be (D). And it also can't be (B) since the n=2 state wouldn't be all the way up at -6 eV.
Now remember that 470 nm falls in the visible regime, so the energy difference must be at around 1-2 eV. This immediately eliminates (C) and (E) since they must be more than this amount lower than the n=4 state. | data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2dbb0/2dbb0a6359f9a33822a5b44305261c318eb3541b" alt="Alternate Solution - Unverified" | archard 2010-07-15 13:50:25 | You can also get it with the Rydberg formula, since you're given the wavelength of the photon and the initial energy level. Then it's just plug and chug.
sina2 2013-09-24 02:17:02 |
I tried in this way, but I failed.
|
nasim 2015-10-12 17:05:01 |
One should first have the Rydberg constant to be able to use Rydberg formula! But doesn\'t!
|
| data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2dbb0/2dbb0a6359f9a33822a5b44305261c318eb3541b" alt="Alternate Solution - Unverified" | asdfman 2009-11-05 00:37:16 | You can quickly narrow this down as anything less than ~400 nm is UV. If you remember that 13.6 eV, from hydrogen yields UV then that tosses out choices C, D, and E. | data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/44870/44870523a04b283b965cd8ae9c7ca868d7c42985" alt="NEC" | f4hy 2009-10-25 19:28:33 | I am confused. When finding are you using the speed of light in cm but the wave length in meters?
kroner 2009-10-29 14:13:19 |
Everything is in meters there.
eV m or 1240 eV nm,
which good value to know off-hand for problems like this.
|
| data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/44870/44870523a04b283b965cd8ae9c7ca868d7c42985" alt="NEC" | astro_allison 2005-12-08 22:50:07 | don't you mean ? | data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/44870/44870523a04b283b965cd8ae9c7ca868d7c42985" alt="NEC" |
|
|
|
|
The Sidebar Chatbox...
Scroll to see it, or resize your browser to ignore it... |
|
|