Photoelectric Effect and Line Spectra (4E)
Help Questions
MCAT Chemical and Physical Foundations of Biological Systems › Photoelectric Effect and Line Spectra (4E)
A hydrogen discharge tube is analyzed with a spectrometer. Three visible emission lines are recorded at approximately 656 nm, 486 nm, and 434 nm. (Constants: $c=3.00\times 10^8,\text{m/s}$, $h=6.63\times 10^{-34},\text{J·s}$.) Based on quantized electronic energy levels, which conclusion is most consistent with observing discrete wavelengths rather than a continuous spectrum?
Hydrogen emits only at wavelengths where the spectrometer has maximum sensitivity
Electrons in hydrogen can occupy only specific energy levels, so emitted photons have specific energies
The emission wavelengths are determined by the tube’s temperature through blackbody radiation alone
Hydrogen atoms emit a continuous range of photon energies, but only three are detected in the visible
Explanation
This question tests understanding of atomic line spectra and quantized energy levels. Line spectra demonstrate that electrons in atoms can only occupy specific, discrete energy levels, a fundamental principle of quantum mechanics. When electrons transition between these quantized levels, they emit photons with energies exactly equal to the energy difference between levels. Since energy levels are fixed for a given element, the emitted photon energies (and thus wavelengths via E = hc/λ) are also discrete and characteristic. The three observed wavelengths correspond to specific electronic transitions in hydrogen atoms. This contrasts with continuous spectra from hot solids, where thermal motion produces a broad range of energies. The discrete nature of the spectrum provides direct evidence for quantization in atomic systems, distinguishing it from classical predictions of continuous emission.
In a photoelectric setup, monochromatic light of frequency $f$ shines on a metal. The stopping potential is measured as $V_s$. The frequency is increased to $2f$ while the intensity is unchanged and the metal is unchanged. (Constants: $h=6.63\times 10^{-34},\text{J·s}$, $e=1.60\times 10^{-19},\text{C}$.) Which change is expected, assuming both frequencies exceed threshold?
The stopping potential decreases because higher frequency means fewer photons per second
The stopping potential is unchanged because intensity, not frequency, sets electron energy
The stopping potential increases because the maximum electron kinetic energy increases with photon energy
Electron emission ceases because doubling frequency reduces wave amplitude below threshold
Explanation
This question tests understanding of how photon frequency affects the photoelectric effect. The photoelectric effect demonstrates that the maximum kinetic energy of emitted electrons depends directly on photon frequency through the relationship KEmax = hf - φ. When frequency doubles from f to 2f, the photon energy doubles from hf to 2hf. Since the work function φ remains constant for the same metal, the maximum kinetic energy increases by hf. The stopping potential, which measures this maximum kinetic energy through eVs = KEmax, must therefore increase. This linear relationship between frequency and stopping potential is a key prediction of the photon model. Common misconceptions include thinking that frequency affects the number of electrons rather than their energy, or that intensity determines electron energy.
In a photoelectric experiment, a clean sodium surface is illuminated with monochromatic light. The frequency is varied while intensity is held constant. Electrons are detected only when $f \ge 5.5\times 10^{14},\text{Hz}$. For $f=7.0\times 10^{14},\text{Hz}$, the stopping potential is $V_s=0.62,\text{V}$. (Constants: $h=6.63\times 10^{-34},\text{J·s}$, $e=1.60\times 10^{-19},\text{C}$.) Which outcome would be expected if the light intensity is increased (same $f=7.0\times 10^{14},\text{Hz}$)?
The stopping potential increases because each electron absorbs more energy per photon at higher intensity
The stopping potential stays the same, but the emitted electron current increases
Electron emission stops unless the frequency is increased further above threshold
The threshold frequency decreases because a brighter beam lowers the work function
Explanation
This question tests understanding of how light intensity affects the photoelectric effect when frequency is held constant. The photoelectric effect demonstrates that electron emission depends on individual photon energy (determined by frequency), not the total light intensity. When intensity increases at constant frequency, more photons strike the surface per unit time, but each photon still has the same energy. Since the stopping potential depends only on the maximum kinetic energy of emitted electrons (which equals photon energy minus work function), it remains unchanged. However, more photons mean more electrons are emitted, increasing the photocurrent. The common misconception is that higher intensity means more energy per electron, but in the quantum model, each electron absorbs exactly one photon regardless of intensity.
A vacuum photoelectric cell with a metal cathode is illuminated by monochromatic light. At frequency $f_1$, no electrons are emitted even at high intensity. At a slightly higher frequency $f_2$, electrons are emitted and a stopping potential is measurable. (Constants: $h=6.63\times 10^{-34},\text{J·s}$, $e=1.60\times 10^{-19},\text{C}$.) Which statement is most consistent with the photoelectric effect principle illustrated by these observations?
The stopping potential determines the photon frequency rather than the electron kinetic energy
Electron emission requires photons with energy exceeding a material-specific work function
Electron emission depends only on light intensity because brighter light has larger wave amplitude
Increasing intensity always increases the maximum kinetic energy of emitted electrons
Explanation
This question tests the fundamental principle of the photoelectric effect regarding threshold frequency. The photoelectric effect reveals that electron emission requires individual photons to have sufficient energy to overcome the material's work function, demonstrating energy quantization. At frequency f₁, no emission occurs because photon energy (hf₁) is less than the work function, regardless of intensity. At f₂, photon energy exceeds the work function, enabling electron emission. This observation directly contradicts classical wave theory, which would predict that sufficient intensity at any frequency could provide enough total energy for emission. The key insight is that energy transfer occurs in discrete quanta (photons), and each electron-photon interaction is independent. Common distractors incorrectly suggest that intensity alone determines emission or misunderstand the relationship between stopping potential and photon properties.
A metal surface with work function $\phi$ is illuminated by light of frequency $f$ just above threshold. The emitted electrons are collected, and a stopping potential $V_s$ is measured. The experiment is repeated with the same metal but with a different light source of lower frequency (still above threshold) and higher intensity. (Constants: $h=6.63\times 10^{-34},\text{J·s}$, $e=1.60\times 10^{-19},\text{C}$.) Which result is expected?
The stopping potential is larger because higher intensity transfers more energy to each electron
The stopping potential is unchanged because work function depends only on intensity
The stopping potential is smaller because photon energy is lower at lower frequency
No electrons are emitted because any decrease in frequency prevents emission regardless of threshold
Explanation
This question tests understanding of how photon frequency affects electron kinetic energy in the photoelectric effect. The photoelectric effect follows the energy conservation equation: hf = φ + KEmax, where the photon energy is divided between overcoming the work function and providing kinetic energy to the electron. When frequency decreases while remaining above threshold, the photon energy (hf) decreases. Since the work function φ is constant for a given metal, the maximum kinetic energy of emitted electrons must decrease. The stopping potential, related by eVs = KEmax, therefore decreases proportionally. Intensity affects only the number of photons (and thus electrons), not the energy per electron. This demonstrates the particle nature of light, where each photon's energy depends solely on its frequency, not the beam intensity.
Monochromatic light of wavelength $\lambda$ illuminates a metal surface in a photoelectric cell. The wavelength is decreased (toward the ultraviolet) while intensity is held constant. (Constants: $c=3.00\times 10^8,\text{m/s}$, $h=6.63\times 10^{-34},\text{J·s}$.) Assuming the original light already caused emission, which change is expected?
The maximum kinetic energy decreases because shorter wavelength means fewer photons hit the surface
The emitted electron current must decrease to zero because ultraviolet light cannot eject electrons
The work function increases because wavelength determines a metal’s intrinsic binding energy
The maximum kinetic energy of emitted electrons increases because photon energy increases as $\lambda$ decreases
Explanation
This question tests understanding of how wavelength relates to photon energy in the photoelectric effect. The relationship E = hc/λ shows that photon energy is inversely proportional to wavelength - as wavelength decreases, photon energy increases. When wavelength shifts toward ultraviolet (shorter λ), frequency increases and photon energy rises. In the photoelectric effect, this increased photon energy translates directly to increased maximum kinetic energy of emitted electrons, following KEmax = hf - φ. Since the work function φ remains constant for the same metal, any increase in photon energy appears as increased electron kinetic energy. The stopping potential, which measures this maximum kinetic energy, therefore increases. Common misconceptions include thinking that wavelength affects the number of electrons or that ultraviolet light cannot cause emission.
In a photoelectric experiment, a student plots stopping potential $V_s$ versus light frequency $f$ for a given metal and obtains a straight line with positive slope. (Constants: $h=6.63\times 10^{-34},\text{J·s}$, $e=1.60\times 10^{-19},\text{C}$.) Which interpretation is most consistent with this linear relationship?
The slope is caused by intensity variations, since frequency does not affect electron energy
The slope corresponds to the work function $\phi$, which increases with frequency
The slope indicates photon momentum is quantized, so $V_s$ is independent of $f$
The slope corresponds to $h/e$, consistent with $eV_s = hf - \phi$
Explanation
This question tests understanding of the linear relationship between stopping potential and frequency in the photoelectric effect. The photoelectric equation eVs = hf - φ predicts that stopping potential varies linearly with frequency, with slope h/e. This relationship arises because each photon's energy (hf) is divided between overcoming the work function (φ) and providing kinetic energy to the electron (eVs). The positive slope indicates that higher frequency photons impart more kinetic energy to electrons after overcoming the constant work function. This linear relationship was crucial historical evidence for the photon model of light, as it directly contradicts classical wave predictions. The slope's value provides a method to measure Planck's constant, while the x-intercept gives the threshold frequency. Common misconceptions involve confusing the roles of frequency and intensity in determining electron energy.
A photoelectric cell shows a stopping potential of 0.30 V when illuminated with light of frequency $f$. When illuminated with light of frequency $f+\Delta f$, the stopping potential increases by 0.20 V. (Constants: $h=6.63\times 10^{-34},\text{J·s}$, $e=1.60\times 10^{-19},\text{C}$.) Which statement is most consistent with the underlying relationship between $V_s$ and $f$?
$V_s$ increases linearly with $f$ because $eV_s$ tracks the maximum kinetic energy $K_{\max}=hf-\phi$
$V_s$ increases quadratically with $f$ because photon energy scales as $f^2$
$V_s$ depends only on intensity, so changing frequency cannot change $V_s$
$V_s$ is independent of $f$ because work function is fixed for a given metal
Explanation
This question tests understanding of the linear relationship between stopping potential and frequency. The photoelectric equation eVs = hf - φ can be rearranged to show Vs = (h/e)f - φ/e, revealing a linear relationship with slope h/e. When frequency increases by Δf, the stopping potential increases by ΔVs = (h/e)Δf. The 0.20 V increase for a frequency increase of Δf confirms this linear relationship. This linearity is a fundamental prediction of the photon model and was historically important in validating quantum theory. The relationship shows that each unit increase in frequency produces the same increase in stopping potential, regardless of the starting frequency. This constant slope h/e provides a method to measure Planck's constant and demonstrates that photon energy depends linearly on frequency.
A photoelectric cathode is illuminated with light of frequency below the measured threshold frequency. The intensity is increased by a factor of 100 while keeping frequency fixed. Which observation is expected? (Constants: $h=6.63\times 10^{-34},\text{J·s}$.)
Electrons are emitted with lower kinetic energy because intensity increases photon wavelength
No electrons are emitted because individual photon energy remains below the work function
Electrons are emitted because enough total energy accumulates from many photons
The threshold frequency decreases because intensity reduces the metal’s work function
Explanation
This question tests understanding of the threshold frequency concept in the photoelectric effect. The photoelectric effect demonstrates that electron emission requires individual photons to have energy exceeding the work function, regardless of total light intensity. When frequency is below threshold, each photon has energy less than the work function (hf < φ), making electron emission impossible. Increasing intensity only increases the number of these insufficient-energy photons, not their individual energies. This observation was crucial evidence against classical wave theory, which predicted that sufficient intensity at any frequency could accumulate enough energy for emission. The quantum nature of light means energy transfer occurs in discrete packets, and each electron-photon interaction is independent. No amount of low-energy photons can combine to eject a single electron.
A hydrogen discharge tube is run at two different accelerating voltages for the electrons in the tube. The observed visible emission lines occur at the same wavelengths in both conditions, but the lines are brighter at higher voltage. Which conclusion is most consistent with quantized emission spectra?
Line wavelengths are set by the spectrometer grating and should change with brightness
Higher voltage increases the number of excited atoms, increasing intensity without changing line positions
Higher voltage increases photon energy directly, so each line shifts to shorter wavelength
Higher voltage changes the allowed energy levels, shifting the wavelengths but not intensity
Explanation
This question tests understanding of how discharge tube conditions affect emission spectra. Line spectra wavelengths are determined by the quantized energy differences between atomic levels, which are intrinsic properties of the atom and do not change with external conditions like tube voltage. Higher accelerating voltage increases the kinetic energy of electrons colliding with gas atoms, leading to more frequent excitations and more atoms in excited states per unit time. This increases the number of photons emitted (brightness) without changing their energies or wavelengths. The observation that wavelengths remain constant while intensity increases confirms that atomic energy levels are fixed properties. This principle underlies spectroscopic identification of elements, as emission wavelengths serve as unique fingerprints regardless of excitation conditions.