Laboratory Report April 10, 2014 No.

Measuring Planks Constant h using Photoelectric Effect

Matheus L. Lize
Universidade Federal Do Parana (UFPR) matheuslosslize@gmail.com Abstract
We were able to test the Einstein theory of the photoelectric effect, where the maximum Kinetic energy depends (linearly) on the frequency of the light and the surface material (Work Function), and saw the wave-particle duality behave of the light. Using Mercury lamp, the light pass through a diffraction grid that separate the spectrum, we determined the retarding Potential for each frequency, with and without optical band lters. Using the lters we get a better agreement for the Planks constant h = 3.776e15 0.108e15 , with a reasonable accuracy ( 9% less then the real value).

1.

Introduction

n 1886 and 1886 Hertz discovered that an electric discharge between two electrodes occurs more readily when there is ultraviolet light in one of the electrodes [1], at the same time Leonard show that the light helps to discharge of a metal by making electrons escape from the metal plate. The ejection of electrons from a surface by the light is called the photoelectric effect. In 1905 A. Einstein in his miracle year wrote 3 amazing papers where one of then was to explain the photoelectric effect. Einstein took the Planks idea that radiation was quantized (Ultraviolet catastrophe) and Leonard experiment and proposed that the energy of the electron eject was proportional to the energy of the light with a constant (work function) that varies with different types of metal.

2.

Theory

The experimental facts of the photoelectric effect were appositive from that classical wave description of light from Maxwell[1] : From the wave theory the intensity of the light is proportional to Electric Field E, and the force that acts on the electron is eE, so the kinetic energy should be proportion to the light intensity, but this is

not what the experiment shows. Kmax does not depend of the light intensity. The electron should be ejected from the surface if you apply the right amount of intensity (energy), but the fact is, that for each metal there is a characteristic frequency where below that the metal will not emit any electron. The classical view predicts that the electron will absorb energy from the light bean until have enough energy and escape from the surface, except this time (absorb and escape) does not agree with the experiment, where seems that the electron is emitted right a way when the light arrives in the metal surface. With all this in mind Einstein wrote a paper (On a Heuristic Viewpoint Concerning the Production and Transformation of Light) [2], to explain the photoelectric effect. The maximum Kinetic energy depends on the frequency of the light and the surface material. Einstein assumed the energy, that the electron absorb, from the photon is related by: E = h (1)

By conservation of energy the maximum kinetic energy that the electron will have is Kmax = h (2) 1

Laboratory Report April 10, 2014 No. 1

Where is called the work function, is the energy that the electron need to scape the surface of metal, its depending of the valence band and atomic arrangement of the metal. This simple idea can explain the facts that (1) the Kmax does not depend on the intensity, however depend on the frequency of the light, (2) if the electron does not have the E() larger that the work function will not scape, and (3)the light come in small parts of energy (photons), when this photons have the right energy hit the electron, the electron will scape the surface. The photoelectric theory introduces the wave-particle duality concept that, the light some times behaves as wave or particle depending on the experiment,in another way how you interfere with light.

focalized in the center of the photoelectron detector, we can turn the detector clockwise or anti clockwise to select each part (frequency) of the spectrum separately. Color Yellow Green Blue Violet UV frequency (1012 Hz) 518.62 2 548.99 2 687.85 2 740.85 2 820.26 2 Wavelengths (nm) 578.00 2 546.07 2 435.83 2 404.65 2 365.48 2

Table 1: The Mercury Lamp spectrum

3. 3.1.

Experimental Setup

Schematic
Figure 2: Schematic for the Photoelectron Detector [4]

The inside the photoelectron detector, Figure 2, there is a photocell that is the metal that will lose electrons (photoelectron effect) and a photoelectron plate that will ketch the electron, those electrons will create a current, but if you apply enough voltage so that all electrons dont arrive at the photoelectron detector, thus will not generate current,this voltage is called stopped voltage or retarding potential.
Figure 1: Schematic setup for the experiment, using a Mercury Lamp passing the grid that are able to separate the frequencies in space, and study each one in the photoelectron detector.

4.

DATA & ANALYSIS

3.2.

Apparatus Description

The setup can be seen on the Figure 1, and it consist of monochromatic light of mercury lamp, where this light will pass through a diffraction grid that will separate the spectrum of Mercury in different wavelengths, can be seen at Table 1 [3]. Then we add the photoelectron detector in front of the light that pass the grid without diffract. After the light is 2

To get the Planks from Equation 2, we measured the Retarding Potential (Vr ) for each frequency (Table 2 ). The Retarding potential is the minimum potential to stop the electron from scape the surface, thus the energy associate with the electron is eVr. The Equation 2 become: eVr = h (3)

Then we have a linear relationship between the stopping potential Vr and the frequency

Laboratory Report April 10, 2014 No. 1

(). The measurement of the retarding potential oscillated over time so this insert an error in the voltage around 0.02 eV. The equipment that we used gave us directly the energy associated with the Retarding Potential(eVr ).
Freq.(1012 Hz) 518.65 2 548.99 2 687.85 2 740.85 2 820.26 2 Ret.Potencial(eV) (with Filter) 0.837 0.02 (0.585) 0.879 0.02 (0.675) 1.373 0.02 1.471 0.02 1.637 0.02

photocell. The Equation 3 says that the constant term is the Work Function, from the linear t with lter we found = 1.354eV 0.072. Now that we have the equation we can nd the cutoff frequency 0 by putting the k max = 0 in Equation 2 we have 0 = h (4)

Table 2: The measurement of the Retarding potential (Vo ) for each frequency. For the frequencies 518.5 and 548.99 it was added a yellow and green lter respectively.

In the rst set of measurements we didnt use any type of lter, we just select the frequency by the color. The plot Vr vs. (Figure 3) gave us a linear dependence as we expect from the Equation 3 , thus the angular coefcient provided was 2.8162e15 eVs 0.095e15 . Thus h = 2.8162e15 this result is 32% less than the expected value [4] for h = 4.14e15 eV .

where we found 0 = 358e12 Hz 3.1e12 . The measurement with lter was noticeably better than with no lter, the reason is in the the way we separated the frequencies is not perfect, thats why when we add the lter the Stopping Potential dropped almost 30%. With the lter the energy due the frequency, is more precisely the one we assumed (Table 1) that was the true value, where we used to make the plot.

5.

CONCLUSION

Figure 3: The graph show that the Retarding Potential has a linear dependence in the frequency and the slope of this linear t is the Planks constant

In the second time we used two lters, a yellow and a green. The Retarding Potential decrees about 30% for the rst two measurement (Table 2). Than the Linear t provide us a linear coefcient h = 3.776e15 0.108e15 , it is 9% less than the real value. In the same equation we can nd the Work Function for the

The astonishing thing of this experiment is that we could observer the two types of behave of the wave-particle duality, where when the light passed through the grid acts like wave (interference and diffraction) and when it hit the metal surface the photoelectric effect occurs, the light act like a particle. Because of the limitation of the experiment apparatus we werent able to directly observe some fact of the photoelectric effect. We used kind of black box, we knew how it works but we couldnt change the current and set by ourselves the stop potential. Instead we assumed that the photoelectron detector does work as we expected, thus we were able to get the Planks constant h = 3.776e 15 0.108e 15eVs, with a reasonable accuracy ( 9% less then the real value). I think the main reason for this shift is because we didnt have lters for the other colors, because as we add the lter, the Retarding Potential dropped signicantly, if we keep doing this for the other frequencies all values will (probably) drop to, so the slop of the t will increase, therefore the Planks constant will rise, getting close to the existent value. 3

Laboratory Report April 10, 2014 No. 1

References
[1] R. Eisberg and R. Resnick. Quantum Physics of Atoms,Molecules, Solids, Nuclei, and Particles. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1985 A. Einstein. Annalen der Physik. 132, 1905.

[3]

J. Varalda. UFPR Roteiro De Laboratorio de Fisica Moderna, o Efeito Fotoelectrico. 2014

[4]

[2]

The Physics Hypertextbook. http://physics.info/photoelectric/circuit.html. 04/09/2014