De Broglie Wavelength Calculation given electron velocity

In summary, the conversation discusses the calculation of an electron's De Broglie Wavelength, which is found by dividing Planck's constant by the momentum of the electron. The initial attempt at a solution was incorrect due to using an incorrect value for Planck's constant. The correct solution was found to be 290 pm, which is in agreement with the book's listed answer. Another related problem was discussed, with an answer of 2038 m/s, which is slightly off but not significantly so.
  • #1
msc8127
23
0

Homework Statement


an electron is moving at 2.5 x 105m/s. Find the electron's De Broglie Wavelength.


Homework Equations



De Broglie relates wavelength of electron waves to momentum of the electron by lambda = h/p where h is Planck's constant.


The Attempt at a Solution



given the velocity above of 2.5 x 105m/s, I multiplied that velocity by 9.109 x 10-31kg to get momentum (p).

from there i used (4.136 x 10-15eVs) / (9.109 x 10-31kg)(2.5 X 105m/s)

This gives me 18162257108.4 m which is off by many orders of magnitude from the 180pm that the book lists as the answer.

Can someone please show me where I'm going stupid on this one?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
msc8127 said:

Homework Statement


an electron is moving at 2.5 x 105m/s. Find the electron's De Broglie Wavelength.


Homework Equations



De Broglie relates wavelength of electron waves to momentum of the electron by lambda = h/p where h is Planck's constant.


The Attempt at a Solution



given the velocity above of 2.5 x 105m/s, I multiplied that velocity by 9.109 x 10-31kg to get momentum (p).

from there i used (4.136 x 10-15eVs) / (9.109 x 10-31kg)(2.5 X 105m/s)

This gives me 18162257108.4 m which is off by many orders of magnitude from the 180pm that the book lists as the answer.

Can someone please show me where I'm going stupid on this one?

Thanks!

? That's not Planck's constant.
 
  • #3
6.626 x 10^-34 Js is actually Planck's constant. I tried that and I get the correct order of magnitude, but instead of getting 180pm i get 290pm...the number posted in the original post is Plancks constant converted to eV (which I'm sure you already knew)

Either form of Planck's constant that i use I'm getting an incorrect solution

thank you
 
  • #4
msc8127 said:

The Attempt at a Solution



given the velocity above of 2.5 x 105m/s, I multiplied that velocity by 9.109 x 10-31kg to get momentum (p).

from there i used (4.136 x 10-15eVs) / (9.109 x 10-31kg)(2.5 X 105m/s)

This gives me 18162257108.4 m ...
No, that's wrong because the units do not work out to be meters. Your answer here should be 18162257108.4 eV*s2/kg*m.

... which is off by many orders of magnitude from the 180pm that the book lists as the answer.
Argh, the book is wrong. Your answer of 290 pm is better, you just have the wrong power of 10 in your calculation.

Note for future: when dealing in kg, m, and s then use J for energy, not eV.
 
  • #5
I'm having another problem too. It's not the same but I have been looking everywhere to find my answer and I don't know if I am correct. I used this walkthrough I found to get my answer but I used a different wavelength for my experiment. Here's the link.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_speed_of_the_electron_with_a_de_Broglie_wavelength_of_235nm

I did the same thing except I used a wavelength of 400 nm and my answer was 2038 m/s. This is one of my first problems with this and I was just curious if anyone could comfirn this answer or if I failed horribly.

Thanks.
 
  • #6
evanallmighty said:
I'm having another problem too. It's not the same but I have been looking everywhere to find my answer and I don't know if I am correct. I used this walkthrough I found to get my answer but I used a different wavelength for my experiment. Here's the link.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_speed_of_the_electron_with_a_de_Broglie_wavelength_of_235nm

I did the same thing except I used a wavelength of 400 nm and my answer was 2038 m/s. This is one of my first problems with this and I was just curious if anyone could comfirn this answer or if I failed horribly.

Thanks.
You're a little off but not horribly off.

For future reference, please start a new thread with your question, even if it is related (but not identical) to an existing one.
 
  • #7
Thanks I'll keep that in mind! I just joined this forum so yeah.

Thanks for your help!
 

FAQ: De Broglie Wavelength Calculation given electron velocity

What is the De Broglie wavelength?

The De Broglie wavelength is a concept in quantum mechanics that describes the wave-like behavior of matter. It is the wavelength associated with a particle, such as an electron, and is calculated using the particle's momentum.

How is the De Broglie wavelength calculated for an electron?

The De Broglie wavelength for an electron is calculated using the formula λ = h/mv, where λ is the wavelength, h is Planck's constant, m is the mass of the electron, and v is the velocity of the electron.

What is the significance of the De Broglie wavelength in quantum mechanics?

The De Broglie wavelength is significant because it demonstrates the wave-particle duality of matter. It shows that matter can exhibit both particle-like and wave-like behavior, and is an important concept in understanding quantum mechanics.

How does the velocity of an electron affect its De Broglie wavelength?

The De Broglie wavelength is inversely proportional to the velocity of the electron. This means that as the electron's velocity increases, its wavelength decreases. This relationship is a fundamental principle in quantum mechanics.

Can the De Broglie wavelength be used to calculate the position of an electron?

No, the De Broglie wavelength alone cannot be used to calculate the position of an electron. The uncertainty principle in quantum mechanics states that the position and momentum of a particle cannot be known simultaneously, so the De Broglie wavelength only provides information about the momentum of the electron.

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Back
Top