The Photoelectric Effect 3TECG

The Photoelectric Effect

By Patrick Doheny, Michelle Yu, Alex Trinh, Jiaxin Chen, Jessica Catherine Estephan and Gursukhmani Benipal Abstract Quantum mechanics has revolutionized modern physics, detailing the wave-matter duality of light and electromagnetic radiation alike. The energy of a photon comes in multiples of an elementary unit. This report contains tests that were performed to find an elementary unit known as Plancks constant. The value was found by investigating the stopping voltage of the sample inside a phototube and by determining the work function of the sample. Using a light source of constant intensity was shown to yield the best result out of the tests having only an error of 9%, while values obtained in the other tests had very large errors. These errors were due to low signal to noise ratios, noise coming from background light. Introduction Throughout the nineteenth century, there have been arguments between various scientific figures about the properties of light. These properties came to include the ability to reflect, diffract and was able to interfere with one another. Scottish mathematician and physicist, James Clerk Maxwell, demonstrated through mathematical formulae, the existence of electromagnetic radiation which was capable of moving at the speed of light. He also concluded that light was a type of electromagnetic wave. These electromagnetic waves consisted of electric and magnetic fields which propagated through space in the form of transverse waves. This idea drove experimentalists to try and find this radiation. German Physicist, Heinrich Hertz, was successful in his attempt, using an induction coil to cause a spark, which in turn emitted the radiation. This radiation was detected using a copper wire bent into a circle. But throughout the performance of his investigation he noticed that when the apparatus used to detect the radiation was placed under a source of ultraviolet light, the sparks became more vigorous. This observation was later dubbed the Photoelectric Effect. The explanation behind this observation was not all well known. If we observed a black body, an object which is a perfect emitter and absorber of radiation, it should be absorbing or emitting an infinite amount of energy, which does not obey the Law of Conservation of Energy. This also applies to the photoelectric effect. By using the classical model of light we should expect the same result no matter what wavelength of light was used, ie all wavelengths of light should be able to eject electrons as the energy of the wave should build up as electrons continuously absorbs it. German physicist, Max Planck, proposed that if light came in small packets, it would solve the black body problem. The energy that each packet contained would be a multiple of a small elementary unit. This unit is now known as Plancks constant. This report contains descriptions of experiments which utilized the photoelectric effect to derive an experimental value for Plancks constant. The experiments included using a constant light source where its frequency could be changed using filters, and using a constant metal sample to obtain a linear result. The results obtained from this can be used to extrapolate and measure Plancks constant. This result is also compared to an already predetermined and published value of Plancks constant.

The Photoelectric Effect 3TECG

Theory All conducting metals exhibit the behaviour of being able to eject electrons when presented with light of a certain frequency. This is known as the Photoelectric Effect. Electrons emitted by this process are known as photoelectrons. Einstein proposed in 1905, that a photon of light contains energy equal to frequency of the light multiplied by a constant,

where h is a constant and f is the frequency of the photon absorbed. If a monochromatic light, light of a single frequency, was used to eject electrons from a surface, the amount of energy that each photon contained will be equal. The minimum frequency of the energy that each electron can absorb is known as the threshold frequency. This threshold frequency determines the amount of energy required to bring an electron from its atom to its highest orbit and freeing it from the atom itself. Energy with frequency below this threshold will not be absorbed by the electrons as they cannot exist between energy states. Different metals will have electrons with different threshold frequencies. When an electron absorbs a photon, all of its energy will be absorbed. It is impossible to absorb a fraction of a photon. The rest of the energy is contributed to its kinetic energy. Since the energy is in discrete finite amounts, the kinetic energy will also be finite. This kinetic energy determines how far or fast an electron can move from the atom. The kinetic energy is given by the equation,

where E is the kinetic energy and W is the work function, the energy required for an electron to be moved from a solids surface immediately outside the outer surface. The stopping voltage is the voltage required to stop the current flow due to the emitted electrons from reaching the anode of the phototube. This voltage must equal the kinetic energy of each electron. Since we know the value of the voltage, the stopping voltage multiplied by the charge of an electron will have a value equal to the energy in Joules. Equation (2) can then be divided through by e, the charge on an electron e = 1.6x10-19Coulomb, obtaining the equation,

where V is the stopping voltage and e is the charge on an electron.

The Photoelectric Effect 3TECG

Experimental Procedure Tests were performed on a metal sample, Caesium, using different types of light sources, including constant/variable white light. The photo tube was connected in series with a power supply and the voltmeter and ammeter were all a part of the Photoelectric Effect apparatus. The experimental setup is as indicated in Fig. 1

Light source

Figure 1: Experimental setup for photoelectric effect investigation Three series of tests were performed. In the first series, Test I, a constant light source was used. Filters were placed in front of the light source to vary the frequency of the photons emitted from the lamp in order to obtain a varying stopping voltage. The frequencies obtained by these filters can be obtained using equations,

where is the wavelength of each filter. The speed of light may have altered due to interference and propagation through a different medium but the change was negligible and the speed was assumed to be constant. The filters used reduced the intensity of the light which will affect the results so a standard table of values developed by the manufacturer was used to determine the factor in which the intensity was reduced. The light was then shone onto the phototube. The phototube consisted of an anode and a cathode. The cathode is semicircular and is very light sensitive, especially to visible and ultraviolet light. The surface of the cathode has a low work function so electrons are able to be easily emitted when presented with visible light. Photoelectrons will then flow into the anode, thus completing the circuit. By using the DC power supply, the stopping voltage was determined by adjusting a dial. The current was monitored until the flow of electrons in the phototube stopped. From this an applied voltage can then be read. By using the values of the different frequencies and stopping voltages, a graph was obtained using Equation (3) which was then used to determine the gradient, the work function, and the threshold frequency.

The Photoelectric Effect 3TECG

A second test, Test II, was performed using a variable light source. The method used was the same as in Test I. The variable light source was connected to a rheostat. The same filters were used throughout this test. Each filter was repeated thrice so that an average stopping voltage could be obtained. The light intensity was adjusted, starting from the lowest intensity to the highest intensity using quarter increments and the test was repeated. The same graph obtained in the first test was created in this test. An average for the results was then calculated. A third test, Test III, was then performed using the same method as the previous tests but LED lights were used instead of an external light source fitted with filters. A different LED was used and came in the similar frequencies as the filters. At the conclusion of the tests the experiments were repeated. Results The frequencies for each filter were calculated using Equation (5). These frequencies are shown in Table 1. Table 1: Measurements for frequencies of filters Filter Colour Shortest Wavelength (nm) Frequency (x1014 Hz) 590 5.09 Red 530 5.66 Orange 492 6.10 Yellow 460 6.52 Green 428 7.01 Blue Since the filters used reduced the intensity of the light the frequencies were altered using the manufacturers guide to fix the intensity loss to calculate the relative intensities of the light source. The uncertainty of the speed of light through the filters was ignored because of its minute change in value. The values for the Stopping voltage were measured with the Photoelectric Effect apparatus with a 3% uncertainty. The readings for the first test are shown in Table 2. Table 2: Measurements for Stopping Voltage
Filter Colour Red Orange Yellow Green Blue Trial 1 0.419 0.629 0.842 0.893 1.174 Trial 2 0.424 0.630 0.841 0.889 1.173 Trial 3 0.422 0.630 0.842 0.888 1.173 Average 0.422 0.630 0.842 0.890 1.173 Uncertainty 0.0127 0.0189 0.0253 0.0267 0.0352

The Photoelectric Effect 3TECG

Using the values for Test I, listed on the table, a Voltage vs Frequency graph was obtained as indicated in Fig. 2
Constant Intensity Source 1.500 Stopping Voltage (V) 1.000 0.500 0.000 -0.500 -1.000 -1.500 -2.000 Frequency (x1014 Hz) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Figure 2: Graph for Stopping Voltage vs Frequency The results obtained in Test II are shown in Fig. 3 as another Stopping Voltage vs Frequency graph. The graphs show the slope of each result for the varying intensities. The voltage was obtained using the Photoelectric Effect apparatus which has an error of 3%. For reference, the values obtained are shown in Table 3 and the errors in Table 4 Table 3: Average Stopping Voltage of electrons for varying light source Filter Colour Average Stopping Voltage for Min Intensity (V) 0.251 0.307 0.371 0.270 0.318 Average Stopping Voltage for Intensity (V) 0.354 0.549 0.732 0.707 0.916 Average Stopping Voltage for Intensity (V) 0.359 0.562 0.686 0.736 0.973 Average Stopping Voltage for Max Intensity (V) 0.412 0.842 0.838 0.904 1.280

Red Orange Yellow Green Blue

Table 4: Uncertainties for Test II Filter Colour Uncertainty for Min Uncertainty for 1/2 Uncertainty for 3/4 Uncertainty for Max 0.00723 0.0106 0.0108 0.0124 Red 0.00921 0.0165 0.0169 0.0253 Orange 0.0111 0.0220 0.0206 0.0251 Yellow 0.00810 0.0212 0.0221 0.0271 Green 0.00954 0.0275 0.0292 0.0384 Blue

The Photoelectric Effect 3TECG

Varying Intensities 1.500 1.000 Stopping Voltage (V) 0.500 0.000 -0.500 -1.000 -1.500 -2.000 Frequency (x1014 Hz) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Minimum Intensity 1/2 Intensity 3/4 Intensity Maximum Intensity

Figure 3: Stopping Voltage vs Frequency graph for Test II The results for Test III are shown as yet another graph, indicated in Fig. 4. These results were obtained using the same apparatus as the previous tests. Table 5 below summarises the results for Test III.

LED 1.000 Stopping Voltage (V) 0.500 0.000 0 -0.500 -1.000 -1.500 Frrequency (x1014 Hz) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Figure 4: Graph for Stopping Voltage vs Frequency using LEDs

The Photoelectric Effect 3TECG

Table 5: Average Stopping Voltage of electrons for LEDs
Filter Colour Red Orange Yellow Green Blue Trial 1 0.332 0.463 0.399 0.744 0.772 Trial 2 0.309 0.477 0.383 0.690 0.814 Trial 3 0.322 0.459 0.355 0.664 0.806 Average 0.321 0.466 0.379 0.699 0.797

Using the results for all three tests, the constant, h, was determined using by first finding the gradient, which was found using Linest in Microsoft Excel. This was repeated throughout all of the tests and an average was found. The work function was also found by looking at the intercepts of the graphs and the average of that was also found. The results for this are presented in Table 6 Table 6: Results for Plancks constant and work function Plancks Constant (J.s) Work Function (J) Threshold Frequency (Hz) Test I 6.032 x 10-34 2.396 x 10-19 3.973 x 1014 Test II 5.150 x 10-34 (minimum intensity omitted) 1.970 x 10-19 (minimum intensity omitted) 14 3.824 x 10 (minimum intensity omitted) Test III 4.008 x 10-34 1.581 x 10-19 3.946 x 1014 Average 5.06 x 10-34 1.982 x 10-19 3.914 x 1014

Discussion The filters used in this experiment were not perfect monochromators, even though they have set wavelengths. The wavelengths were in fact very disagreeable. The apparatus used only showed values up to 3 significant figures long, which can result in excess photoelectrons being emitted as the applied voltage is not accurately known. Values for the stopping voltage for Test II were only consistent and accurate with intense lights and varied significantly with lower intensities, with stopping voltage values of high energy photoelectrons being lower than that of low energy photoelectrons, which is an abnormal characteristic seeing as intensity should not affect the kinetic energy of electrons. This result was consistent, even through repeated use of the filters. An explanation for this is that the experiment was not conducted in a perfectly closed environment. Background light affected the results by allowing excess electrons to be emitted from the cathode with frequencies which were not filtered by the filters, which was a result of a low signal to noise ratio. This seemed to be consistent when testing with lower intensities. Based on the results of Test II, the signal to noise ratio was a lot higher when testing with high intensities.

The Photoelectric Effect 3TECG

Using a spectrometer, it was discovered that the filters were not filtering the light very efficiently, allowing photons of different frequencies to pass, especially for the yellow filter, having its spectra similar to that of the spectra of the two light sources used, shown in Fig.5. The yellow filter also does not have a distinct peak and

Unfiltered Source
Absorbance 3000 2000 1000 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Wavelength (nm)
Constant Light Source Variable Light Source

Yellow
3000 Absorbance 2000 1000 0 0 200 400 600 Wavelength (nm) 800 1000 1200
LED Filter

Figure 5: Comparison of yellow spectra to visible light spectra covers the visible light region, meaning its spectra could range anywhere between the red and blue wavelengths. Photons with those energies fail to be filtered hence reducing the accuracy of the results. The blue and green spectra for the filters were quite similar, being unable to filter wavelengths of ~800nm. This was evidence of small signal to noise ratios. Overall it is the signal to noise ratio that is one of the prominent factors that determines the accuracy of the results. Throughout the tests it is obvious that Plancks constant obtained in Test I had the closest value to the published value. Comparing the results for Test II, we can obtain a value much closer to the published value if we omit the graph for minimum intensity because large errors were obtained with low intensity light during the test and the graphs for higher intensities yielded the most consistent results. The graphs have very similar gradients hence the calculated value for our constant will also be similar. The error for minimum intensity was 44.2%, having the largest error out of the tests in Test II. By doing this, the error for the constant in this test was reduced from 34% to 22% compared to the published value. The percentage error of the value in Test I compared to the published Plancks constant was 9%. This large difference in error between the tests can be explained as the constant obtained in Test II involved finding an average of all the results found through varying intensity. Although 8

The Photoelectric Effect 3TECG

intensity should not play a role in increasing the kinetic energy of the electrons as the work function of the metal is assumed to be constant and only determines the number of electrons emitted, the apparatus may have been more prone to background light as discussed above. The work function obtained in Test I and Test II did not agree with the actual value. The work function for Caesium is 2.10eV or 3.366 x 10-19 J, which means that the value obtained in this experiment had an error of 41% compared to the published value. The found threshold frequency had an error of 24% compared to the known threshold frequency, an error which was a lot lower than the error in the work function. The experimental value for Test I and Test II was 28.8% and 41.5% off the published value respectively. This large error was caused by factors discussed above. These factors also caused the experimental threshold frequency to be lower than the published value, with Test I and Test II having an error of 23.6% and 26.5% respectively. Using LED lights yielded more consistent results. The spectra of each LED had distinctive peaks, meaning that it filtered light more effectively than the filters. The size of the LED is also advantageous, allowing the light beam to be more concentrated onto the cathode, increasing accuracy of results. LEDs are made so that the maximum amount of photons that are emitted to increase efficiency in everyday use. This is extremely advantageous in Test III as this also increases the signal to noise ratio. Looking at the results in Test III, the results were more consistent at low intensities compared to using filtered light at low intensity. Although the results for this test resulted in a shallow slope, leading to an error of 40% compared to the current value, the LED lights were very small in size compared to the light sources used in Test I and Test II and also to the hole in which the LEDs were placed, leading to low signal to noise ratios, even though they are very efficient in ensuring the maximum amount of photons emitted. This error occurred throughout the use of all of the LED light sources. Although there were errors that could have been avoided and errors that were beyond our control, calculation of the constant throughout all the tests resulted in very small values which is in an agreement that Plancks constant is a very small number. For future experiments, LED light sources can be used as they filter light more efficiently, but its intensity could be improved by increasing the input current to increase the signal to noise ratio. Light sources of higher intensities can also be used to increase signal to noise ratio. The experiment could also be performed in closed environments to prevent and background light from entering the apparatus, thus improving the results. The value of Plancks constant is known analytically to 7 significant figures, so to improve on the results, an apparatus which can display more than 3 significant figures should be used. Conclusion In conclusion, both a filtered source and LED source were used throughout the experiment to measure the stopping voltage of photoelectrons in order to calculate Plancks constant. With the data and graphs from the experiment, Plancks constant was calculated. From the experiment, Plancks constant was found to be 5.06 x 1034 , which is 23.6% below the published value. This experiment suffered from different factors that affected the measurements, including background light and faulty filters, which disturbed the calculation of the constant. It can be seen from the results that the experiment using the constant light source and lights of higher intensity produced more accurate constants compared to lights of lower intensity as it increased the signal to noise ratio. The LEDs also proved to filter light more effectively than the filters themselves.

The Photoelectric Effect 3TECG

References [1] Gautreau, R. and Savin, W. (1999).Schaum's Outline of Modern Physics. McGraw-Hill.

[2] Millikan, R. (1916). A Direct Photoelectric Determination of Planck's "h".

[3] Serway, R.A. (2010). Physics for Scientists & Engineers.8th edition.

[4] University of Chicago, The Photoelectric Effect & Its Applications, Available: http://cfcpwork.uchicago.edu/kicp-projects/nsta/2007/pdf/nsta_2007-photoeleclab.pdf [5] University of Virginia, Modern Physics: The Photoelectric Effect, Available: http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/252/photoelectric_effect.html [6] Young, H.D and Freedman, R.A. (2011).University Physics with Modern Physics.12th edition, Pearson Education Acknowledgements Alex Trinh, Michelle Yu and Jiaxin Chen Jessica Catherine Estephan, Gursukhmani Benipal and Patrick Doheny Responsible for research for the experiment. Performed Test I, Test II and Test III experiments. Prepared report. Performed Test I, Test II and Test III experiments. Responsible for recording data. Prepared talk.

10