Solving Photon Energy with Equations: Am I Right?

In summary, the conversation is discussing a problem involving the energy of a photon with a specific wavelength. The equation E=hc/wavelength is used to calculate the energy, and various other equations are attempted but fail. The next question is whether the energy is enough to ignite a sheet of paper, and it is suggested to use the equation N=N0(1-e^(-μx)) to calculate the number of photons absorbed. However, there is uncertainty about the value of 0.32 in the equation and the combustion temperature of paper. The conversation then continues to discuss the calculation of the energy and the temperature change of the paper using various equations.
  • #36
kuruman said:
You used the correct thickness of the paper 0.1 mm as given by the problem. What I am saying is that 5.6x10^18 x 180 x (1-e^(-0.32x0.1x10^-3)) is NOT 1.03x10^13. You need to redo this calculation correctly.
The rest is ok ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
meher4real said:
The rest is ok ?
No, the rest is not Ok. Cut a piece of paper into a square of side 1 cm. Do you really believe it weighs 80 grams or 80x10^-3kg?
 
  • #38
kuruman said:
No, the rest is not Ok. Cut a piece of paper into a square of side 1 cm. Do you really believe it weighs 80 grams or 80x10^-3kg?
g to kg isn't 10^-3 ?
kuruman said:
You used the correct thickness of the paper 0.1 mm as given by the problem. What I am saying is that 5.6x10^18 x 180 x (1-e^(-0.32x0.1x10^-3)) is NOT 1.03x10^13. You need to redo this calculation correctly.
- N(inter)=5.6x10^18 x 180 x (1-e^(-(0.32x0.1x10^-3)) = 3.23x10^16 photons
- E(abs) = N(inter)xE(photon)
= 7.8 x 10^-3 J
 
Last edited:
  • #39
meher4real said:
g to kg isn't 10^-3 ?

- N(inter)=5.6x10^18 x 180 x (1-e^(-(0.32x0.1x10^-3)) = 3.23x10^16 photons
- E(abs) = N(inter)xE(photon)
= 7.8 x 10^-3 J
I agree with those numbers. Now what?
 
  • Like
Likes meher4real
  • #40
kuruman said:
I agree with those numbers. Now what?
What's wrong with weight 80x10^-3kg ?
 
  • #41
A standard, letter-sized 8.5"×11", sheet of paper weighs 4 to 5 grams. Do you really believe that if you cut a square piece 1 cm on the side out of that sheet, it will weigh 80 grams? :rolleyes:
 
  • #42
kuruman said:
A standard, letter-sized 8.5"×11", sheet of paper weighs 4 to 5 grams. Do you really believe that if you cut a square piece 1 cm on the side out of that sheet, it will weigh 80 grams? :rolleyes:
weight x 1 cm^2 ?
 
  • #43
meher4real said:
weight x 1 cm^2 ?
The whole sheet of paper is 4 grams. If you cut a piece of that paper any size, any shape, can it weigh 20 times as much as the entire sheet? Think!
 
  • #44
kuruman said:
The whole sheet of paper is 4 grams. If you cut a piece of that paper any size, any shape, can it weigh 20 times as much as the entire sheet? Think!
huh you're right, weight/1cm^2
 
  • #45
So what is the mass of 1 cm2 of paper? Read carefully and understand what you are given.
 
  • #46
kuruman said:
So what is the mass of 1 cm2 of paper? Read carefully and understand what you are given.
I found Energy required to heat paper = 0.40 J
number of photons required = 1.612x10^18 photons
 
  • #47
meher4real said:
I found Energy required to heat paper = 0.40 J
number of photons required = 1.612x10^18 photons
I didn't ask you what energy is required to heat the paper and I didn't ask you for the number of photons required. I asked you to find the correct mass of the paper that is heated up. You have repeatedly avoided answering my questions which I am only asking to guide your thinking. Your refusal to answer them indicates to me that you reject my help. If that's the case, I will stop helping you.
 
  • #48
kuruman said:
I didn't ask you what energy is required to heat the paper and I didn't ask you for the number of photons required. I asked you to find the correct mass of the paper that is heated up. You have repeatedly avoided answering my questions which I am only asking to guide your thinking. Your refusal to answer them indicates to me that you reject my help. If that's the case, I will stop helping you.
Not at all !
I really appreciate your time and efforts to help me out with the problem, can't thank you enough, i was literally lost but It's a matter of time for me because your process takes too long to find the solution.
As i said before I'm on rush and I'm working on the last problem rn.
 
  • #49
OK, then you set the pace but we cannot move forward unless you answer my questions. This process is not mine. It is how we proceed in this forum. If you focus on just getting the answer without paying attention to the process that leads you to it, it is unlikely that you will understand what you're doing and why. I can end this 49 posting thread by giving you the complete solution, but I will not do it for two reasons: (a) it is against forum rules and (b) I don't believe it will benefit you if I do.
 
  • Like
Likes Steve4Physics and hutchphd
Back
Top