You are on page 1of 21

Reading quiz – get out a sheet of paper and a writing utensil.

In the Davisson Germer experiment, Davisson and Germer shot a beam of electrons at a lattice of Nickel atoms and found that the electrons were only detected at certain angles. Explain the reason for this result and why it was important.

Review of Bohr and deBroglie
• Background:
– Balmer found equation for Hydrogen spectrum but didn’t know what it meant. – Rutherford found that atoms had a nucleus, but didn’t know why electrons didn’t spiral in.

• Bohr postulates quantized energy levels for no good reason, and predicts Balmer’s equation. • deBroglie postulates that electrons are waves, and predicts Bohr’s quantized energy levels. • Note: no experimental difference between Bohr model and deBroglie model, but deBroglie is a lot more satisfying.

• Schrodinger – will save the day!! .Models of the Atom • Thomson – Plum Pudding • Rutherford – Solar System – Why? Scattering showed hard core. – Problem: just a random guess + – • Bohr – fixed energy levels – Why? Explains spectral lines. – Problem: electrons should spiral into nucleus in ~10-11 sec. – Problem: No reason for fixed energy levels + + • deBroglie – electron standing waves – Why? Explains fixed energy levels – Problem: still only works for Hydrogen. – – – – – – Why? Known that negative charges can be removed from atom.

deBroglie Waves • • • • This is a great story. why no observations of electron waves? What would you need to see to believe that this is actually true? Today: Electron interference! •Why electron waves are hard to see •Designing experiment possible to see with early 1900s tech. But is it true? If so. •How done by Clinton Davisson and Lester Germer •Why their technique still used today (LEED) •How to interpret. .

zilch where cancel (destructive interference) .Reminder. …) interfering. Peaks where add.what do we mean by interference? Phet Wave Interference Sim 1 2 Waves (water. sound.

Two slit interference with light .

Typical for light: slits ~0. V step 2.Question in 1920s So can we just do same experiment but replace beam of light with beam of electrons to check deBroglie? Let’s work through the design to see what expect to see.5 mm apart . what required to do proper experiment. Go off and play with making beams of electrons. Find can make beams of energies between ~25-1000 eV. step 1. Calculate signal would expect to see from double slit.

Find can make beams of energies between ~25-1000 eV. no. yes.step 1. Typical for light: slits ~0. Calculate signal would expect to see from double slit. precisely what would experimental results would you expect?) b.5 mm apart Can we just repeat light double slit experiment with electrons? a. Go off and play with making beams of electrons. precisely why not?) . (if so. step 2. (if so.

2.3…) 1 D  D=m 2 bright H= Lsin()=L H=L H bright r = Dsin()=D Screen far away so 1~2 ~ & small angle approx.5 mm =D  r2 r = r2-r1 r = m (where m=1.Double-slit experiment (see textbook) Determining the space between bright regions (H) L bright r1 0. sin= .

So what will pattern look like with electrons? How figure out? H= L .001 = 3mm.3…) r=m= Dsin()=D =m Calculating pattern for light m = 1. = 500 nm. then H= 3 m x 0.Double-slit experiment Determining the space between bright regions (H) L r1 5 x10-4m = D  r2 H r = r2-r1 r = m (where m=1.001 rad if L = 3m. so angle to first bright = λ/D = 500 x 10-9/(5 x 10-4) = 0.2.

. does not make any difference b. plug into = λ/D = (h/p)(1/D). Smaller energy  smaller momentum  larger λ means bigger angle. calculate angle (radians) Best to do experiment with a. lower. h = 6. 1. find expected wavelength =h/p.6 x 10-34 J s 2.D =m H= L Steps to predict pattern for debroglie electron wave. easier to see. higher energy electron beam b. lower energy electron beam c.

6 x 10-34 J s 2.Steps to predict pattern for debroglie electron wave. λ ~ 1nm (10-9 m) E.6x10-34Js λ = (2 * 25eV * 1. λ ~ 1m Compare with -6 C.6x10 -19J/eV * 9. find expected wavelength =h/p. λ ~ 1pm (10-12 m) D. λ ~ 1mm (10-3m) B.1x10-31kg)1/2 λ = 2. 1.511 x 106 eV)1/2 1 x 103 nm 1 x 103 nm λ = (25 x 106)1/2 = 5 x 103 λ = 1/5 nm ~ 1nm .4 x 10-10 m = 0.24 nm ~ 1nm λ ~ 400-700nm OR λ = hc/(2Emc2)1/2 1240 eV nm λ =(2 * 25eV * . λ ~ 1m (10 m) visible light: Energy E = ½mv2 = p2/2m …so p = (2Em)1/2 …so λ = h/p = h/(2Em)1/2 6. h = 6. calculate angle (radians) For lowest energy electron beam (E = 25eV). how big is electron wavelength? A. plug into = λ/D = (h/p)(1/D).

g.7x10-24 kg m/s 1/2 • p = (2Em) v = 3x106 m/s = c/100 • λ = h/p = h/(2Em)1/2 λ = 0.5eV -27 kg m/s p = 1. photons) Typical photons • E = pc = hc/λ E = 2. Massless Particles Massive Particles (e.24 nm Massless Particles (e.3x10 • p = E/c v = c = 3x108 m/s • λ = h/p = hc/E λ = 500 nm deBroglie relationship is universal . electrons) Lowest energy e-s • E = ½mv2 = p2/2m = h2/2mλ2 E = 25eV p = 2.g.Energy and Momentum for Massive vs.

9 x 10-7 radians!!! Much too small an angle to see! (If L = 3m. plug into = λ/D = (h/p)(1/D).5 x 10-7 m = 150 nm) Big problem. find expected wavelength =h/p.5mm. calculate angle (radians) lowest energy 25 eV gives λ = 2. c. D = λ/D = (2. b.4 x 10-10 m)/(5 x 10-4m) = 4. expect  to be a. then H=L = 1. if electron has wavelength  deBroglie predicted it is REALLY SMALL ~ 2. >1. .Steps to predict pattern for debroglie electron wave. d.4 x 10-10 m So for slit separation D ~ 0. h = 6. Why not seen. <1. >>1.6 x 10-34 J s 2. 1. << 1.4 x 10-10 m.

and b. a. ans. h = 6. electron beam no good) . and c.6 x 10-34 J s. d. make D much bigger. a) make D smaller (already said cannot make E smaller. b. make electron energy lower. = λ/D = (h/p)(1/D).  = 4. b.9 x 10-7 radians Much too small an angle to see! What now? Any way to make angle bigger? a.predict pattern for debroglie electron wave =h/p. c.  = 2. make D much smaller. e.4 x 10-10 m  = λ/D if D = 5 x 10-4 m.

Making lemonade out of lemons .6 x 10-34 J s. need D = 0.25 nm Is that a problem? yes. h = 6.4 x 10-10 m = λ/D to make  easy to see.designing experiment to see debroglie electron wave =h/p. = λ/D = (h/p)(1/D) = 2. like ~1rad. it is about the same size as one atom! Would like to have slits separated by about an atom diameter. Impossible.

Brilliant idea: But two slits are just two sources. Easy to get two objects that scatter electrons that are size of atom! . Hard to get two sources size of atom.

But multiple that are same separation just work better. .But two slits are just two sources. What stuff in nature is made out of things the size of atoms with equal spacing between them? hard to get only two atoms next to each other. Just like reflection diffraction grating.

Davisson and Germer -.VERY clean nickel crystal. e e e e e e Ni e e det. Interference is electron scattering off Ni atoms. see what angle electrons coming off . e e scatter off atoms e e move detector around.

See peak!! # e’s 0 e e e e so probability of angle where detect electron determined by interference of deBroglie waves! 500 scatt. Wave! . angle  e e det. e e e Ni Observe pattern of scattering electrons off atoms Looks like ….

For qualitative use only! http://phet.colorado.PhET Sim: Davisson Germer Careful… near field view: D = m doesn’t work here.jnlp .edu/simulations/schrodinger/dg.