Lecture 2: Quantum Physics

Sears & Zemansky’s University Physics, 14th edition, by Hugh D. Young and Roger A. Freedman, Chapters 38 & 39
Modern Physics, 2nd edition, by Randy Harris, Chapters 3 & 4

1
Light: wave or particles?

o Maxwell theory of the electromagnetism have established that light is an electromagnetic

wave. This conclusion is supported experimentally by the interference, diffraction,
polarization and other effects.

o However when looking closely at emission, absorption and scattering of light, we find
that the energy of the electromagnetic wave is quantized. Light is emitted or absorbed in
the particle-like packages of the definite energy – photons

o Wave – particle duality: light sometimes acts like waves (interference, diffraction, etc),
and sometimes like the particles (emission, absorption or scattering of photons).
Blackbody radiation

Blackbody: ideal model of a body that absorbs all

wavelength of the electromagnetic radiation.

If it absorbs energy, it should also emit energy

if it is in a thermal equilibrium.

Radiation that such body emits is called a

blackbody radiation

Properties of the blackbody radiation depend on

temperature only and are independent of the
material.

Sears & Zemansky’s University Physics, 14th edition, by Hugh D. Young and Roger A. Freedman, Chapter 39, Section 5
Blackbody radiation (continued)

Several properties of blackbody were established

experimentally by 1900.

• Stefan-Boltzman law: Total intensity

(average radiation power per area), emitted
from the surface of the black body is
𝐼 = 𝜎𝑇 4
−8 W
Where 𝜎 = 5.6704 × 10 is the Stefan-
m2 K4
Boltzman constant.

Wien displacement law: peak wavelength 𝜆𝑚 is

inversely proportional to T

𝜆𝑚 𝑇 = 2.90 × 10−3 m ⋅ K
Blackbody radiation (continued)

Attempts to derive these law and explain the observed spectrum from basic principles were
not successful.

Rayleigh formula:

• Light enclosed in a box has series of normal modes (different standing waves). One
can compute number of such modes per wavelength interval 𝑑𝜆

• Due to the equipartition theorem energy of each mode is 𝑘𝑇

• Under these assumptions intensity distribution calculated by Rayleigh (with the help of
Jeans) is
2𝜋𝑐𝑘𝑇
𝐼 𝜆 =
λ4
Blackbody radiation (continued)
2𝜋𝑐𝑘𝑇
𝐼 𝜆 =
λ4

Rayleigh-Jeans formula does not match

experimental data ! It is approximately
correct for long wavelength, but it deviates
sharply for short.

As the wavelength becomes shorter, number

of possible configurations increases without
limit. Moreover

∫ 𝐼 𝜆 𝑑𝜆 = ∞
Ultraviolet Catastrophe
Infinite total intensity is emitted !!!
Plank and Quantum Hypothesis

To derive the expression that matches experiment Plank made an

assumptions that

• Energy of each normal mode of light could have only discrete values
Max Planck (1858– 1947)
𝐸𝑛 = 𝑛ℎ𝑓
where
ℎ = 6.6261 × 10−34 J ⋅ s
It a Plank constant:

• Light can be emitted or absorbed in discreet multiples of fundamental

quanta of energy Δ𝐸 = ℎ𝑓

(Rayleigh assumed that these modes can have any amount of energy).
Plank and Quantum Hypothesis

Probability that oscillator will have am energy 𝑛ℎ𝑓 is proportional to

𝐴 𝑒 −𝑛ℎ𝑓/𝑘𝑇

Probability to excite oscillator is suppressed for large f, most oscillators Max Planck (1858– 1947)
are in the ground state and do not emit. Therefore ultraviolet
catastrophe is avoided.

Result of Plank’s calculations is

2𝜋ℎ𝑐 2
𝐼 𝜆 =
ℎ𝑐
𝜆5 𝑒 𝜆𝑘𝑇 −1

It agrees with the experiment.

Plank and Quantum Hypothesis

Interesting facts:

Plank did not believe in his assumptions initially and spent 5 years
(from 1900 to 1905) trying to find a way to keep agreement with
experiment while letting ℎ → 0. Max Planck (1858– 1947)

He ultimately failed, and got a Nobel prize in Physics in 1918 for his
quantum theory.
 For his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially
for his discovery of the photoelectric effect, Albert
Einstein is awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics 1921.

Photoelectric effect – confirmation of the photon model

For his work on the elementary charge of electricity
and on the photoelectric effect, Robert Andrews
Millikan is awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics 1923.

Sears & Zemansky’s University Physics, 14th edition, by Hugh D. Young and Roger A. Freedman, Chapter 38, Section 1
Modern Physics, 2nd edition, by Randy Harris, Chapter 3, Section 2

10
The photoelectric effect

In the 1880s, Heinrich Hertz demonstrated

that a light beam directed at the surface of a
metal could liberate “electrons” This is the
photoelectric effect – light producing a
flow of electricity. The minimum energy required to free an
electron is the work function 𝜙. This is a
Remark – work function 𝜙. characteristic of the particular metal:
The electron is bound to the metal – an
electron must absorb enough energy from the
incident light to overcome the attraction of
positive ions in the metal, i.e., the light
supplies the “kick” that enables the electron
to escape.
11
Einstein’s photon hypothesis (1905)

A beam of light consists of photons (small

packages of energy). The energy of a photon,
𝐸 = ℎ𝑓,
where Planck’s constant,
ℎ ≈ 6.626 × 10−34 J s,
is a universal constant, and 𝑓 is the light
frequency. According to Einstein, the
kinetic energy of the most energetic electron,
𝐾max = ℎ𝑓 − 𝜙,
where 𝜙 is the work function. The energy
transfer is an all-or-nothing process, i.e., the
electron gets all of the photon’s energy or
none at all.
12
The photoelectric effect experiment

o Two conducting electrodes, 𝐶 and 𝐴, are enclosed in a glass

tube evacuated to a pressure of 0.01 Pa or less†, and
connected by a battery.

o Provided 𝑓 > 𝑓0 , the threshold frequency which is

characteristic of the kind of material of 𝐶, the illuminated 𝐶
emits photoelectrons with various kinetic energies.

o If 𝑓 < 𝑓0 , no light source, no matter how intense, will cause

the emission of photoelectrons. However, any light source,
no matter how weak, will cause the emission of
photoelectrons if 𝑓 > 𝑓0 . (ℎ𝑓0 = 𝜙)

† To minimize collisions between the electrons and gas molecules.

13
The photoelectric effect experiment (cont.)

o No matter how faint the light is, if 𝑓 > 𝑓0 , the first

photoelectrons are emitted virtually instantaneously
(within 10−9 𝑠) after the light source is turned on.

o Depending on 𝑉𝐴𝐶 , the potential of 𝐴 relative to 𝐶,

photoelectrons emitted by the illuminated 𝐶 may or may not
travel across to 𝐴.

o If 𝑉𝐴𝐶 > 0, the electric field points toward 𝐶, all the

electrons are accelerated toward 𝐴 and contribute to the
photocurrent in the external circuit.

14
The photoelectric effect experiment (cont.)

o If 𝑉𝐴𝐶 < 0, the electric field is reversed and by adjusting its

strength, we can prevent the less energetic electrons from
reaching 𝐴.

o We can determine the maximum kinetic energy 𝐾max of the

emitted electrons by making 𝑉𝐴𝐶 , just negative enough so 𝐶 𝐴
that the current stops. Suppose this occurs at 𝑉𝐴𝐶 = −𝑉0 ,
then
𝐾max = 𝑒𝑉0 .
𝑉0 is the stopping potential.

15
The photoelectric effect experiment (cont.)

o For a fixed value of the frequency 𝑓 > 𝑓0 of the incident light, the maximum kinetic
energy of the emitted photoelectrons is totally independent of the intensity of the incident
light.

Doubling the intensity of the incident light leaves the stopping potential 𝑉0 unchanged. The
only effect of increasing the intensity is to increase the number of photoelectrons per second
and hence the photocurrent. 16
The photoelectric effect experiment (cont.)

o If the intensity of the incident light is held constant but its frequency 𝑓 is increased, the
stopping potential 𝑉0 also increases:
𝑉0

ℎ 1
𝑉0 = 𝑓 − 𝜙
𝑒 𝑒

𝑓
1 𝑓0
− 𝜙
𝑒
17
The photoelectric effect experiment (cont.)

Experimental results contradict wave model prediction but consistent with photon model:

Wave model predicts that:

• Intensity of EM wave does not depend on frequency -> photoelectric effect should occur
for any light frequency

• If the light is faint, there should be a delay between illumination of the surface and
ejection of the electron. Energy should accumulate first

• Stopping potential should increase with light intensity and should not depend on light
frequency

18
X-Ray production, light emitted as photons

Sears & Zemansky’s University Physics, 14th edition, by Hugh D. Young and Roger A. Freedman, Chapter 38, Section 2

19
X-rays are produced by bombarding
metal surface with fast-moving
electrons

Slowing down electrons in the anode

target produces X-rays in the process
called “bremsstrahlung” (braking
radiation in German).

20
Minimum wavelength does not depend on But it does depend on the electron energy
the target material
The inverse photoelectric effect
We have “inverse photoelectric effect”.

Due to conservation of energy, electron kinetic energy is equal to the maximum photon
energy.

𝑒𝑉𝐴𝐶 = ℎ𝑓𝑚𝑎𝑥 = ℎ𝑐/𝜆𝑚𝑖𝑛

Conclusion: Photon picture of electromagnetic radiation is valid for emission of the

electromagnetic radiation as well.
Compton effect – further confirmation of the photon model

For his discovery of the effect named after him, Arthur Holly Compton is awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics
1927.

Sears & Zemansky’s University Physics, 14th edition, by Hugh D. Young and Roger A. Freedman, Chapter 38, Section 3
Modern Physics, 2nd edition, by Randy Harris, Chapter 3, Section 4

23
Reminder: photon momentum

According to the special theory of relativity, a (relativistic) particle of (rest) mass 𝑚 with
linear momentum 𝑝 has energy 𝐸 that satisfies:
𝐸 2 − 𝑝 2 𝑐 2 = 𝑚2 𝑐 4 .
Photons have zero (rest) mass. A photon of light of frequency 𝑓 and wavelength 𝜆 has
energy
ℎ𝑐
𝐸 = ℎ𝑓 = .
𝜆
It follows that the magnitude of the linear momentum of a photon,
𝐸 ℎ
𝑝= = .
𝑐 𝜆
The direction of the photon’s linear momentum is the direction in which the electromagnetic
wave is moving.

24
Compton effect experiment: photons are scattered as particles

Wave model: Particle model:

Wavelength of the photon will not Photon looses energy due to collision,
change after scattering its wavelength increases
25
Photon scattering, particle model prediction

𝑚𝑒 𝜃

By conservation of energy,
ℎ𝑐 2
ℎ𝑐
+ 𝑚𝑒 𝑐 = ′ + 𝐸𝑒 , 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝐸𝑒2 = 𝑃𝑒2 𝑐 2 + 𝑚𝑒2 𝑐 4 .
𝜆 𝜆
So,
2 2
ℎ𝑐 ℎ𝑐 ℎ𝑐 ℎ𝑐 ℎ𝑐 ℎ𝑐
𝐸𝑒2 = 𝑃𝑒2 𝑐 2 + 𝑚𝑒2 𝑐 4 = − ′ + 𝑚𝑒 𝑐 2 = − ′ + 2𝑚𝑒 𝑐2 − ′ + 𝑚𝑒2 𝑐 4 .
𝜆 𝜆 𝜆 𝜆 𝜆 𝜆 26
Photon scattering, particle model prediction (continued)

From conservation of energy (previous slide)

2
2 2 2 4
ℎ𝑐 ℎ𝑐 2
ℎ𝑐 ℎ𝑐
𝑃𝑒 𝑐 + 𝑚𝑒 𝑐 = − ′ + 2𝑚𝑒 𝑐 − ′ + 𝑚𝑒2 𝑐 4
𝜆 𝜆 𝜆 𝜆

Therefore
2
2
ℎ ℎ ℎ ℎ
𝑃𝑒 = − ′ + 2𝑚𝑒 𝑐 − ′
𝜆 𝜆 𝜆 𝜆

27
Photon scattering

𝑚𝑒 𝜃

By conservation of linear momentum,

ℎ ℎ ℎ
= ′ cos 𝜙 + 𝑃𝑒 cos 𝜃 , 0 = ′ sin 𝜙 − 𝑃𝑒 sin 𝜃 .
𝜆 𝜆 𝜆
So,
2 2
2
ℎ ℎ ℎ ℎ2 2ℎ2 ℎ2
𝑃𝑒 = − ′ cos 𝜙 + ′ sin 𝜙 = 2 − ′ cos 𝜙 + ′2 .
𝜆 𝜆 𝜆 𝜆 𝜆𝜆 𝜆 28
Photon momentum (cont.)

From the conservation of energy: From the conservation of momentum:

2 2 2 2
2
ℎ ℎ ℎ ℎ ℎ 2ℎ ℎ
𝑃𝑒 = − ′ + 2𝑚𝑒 𝑐 − ′ , 𝑃𝑒2 = 2 − ′ cos 𝜙 + ′2 .
𝜆 𝜆 𝜆 𝜆 𝜆 𝜆𝜆 𝜆
It follows that
2ℎ2 ℎ ℎ 2ℎ2
− ′ + 2𝑚𝑒 𝑐 − ′ = − ′ cos 𝜙
𝜆𝜆 𝜆 𝜆 𝜆𝜆
and
ℎ 1 1
′
1 − cos 𝜙 = 𝑚𝑒 𝑐 − ′
𝜆𝜆 𝜆 𝜆
or
′
ℎ
Δ𝜆 = 𝜆 − 𝜆 = 1 − cos 𝜙 .
𝑚𝑒 𝑐 29
Compton scattering (1922)

o In 1922, Arthur H. Compton, an American physicist, aimed a beam of X-rays at a solid

target and measured the wavelength 𝜆′ of the radiation scattered from the target.

o He discovered that some of the scattered radiation has longer wavelength 𝜆′ than that of
the incident radiation 𝜆, and the change in wavelength Δ𝜆 = 𝜆′ − 𝜆 depends on the angle
𝜙 through which the radiation is scattered:
𝑙𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑠𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑑 𝑏𝑦
′
ℎ 𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑛𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒𝑡
Δ𝜆 = 𝜆 − 𝜆 = 1 − cos 𝜙 .
𝑚𝑒 𝑐 30
Compton scattering (cont.)

Remark.
When the wavelengths 𝜆′ of x rays scattered
at a certain angle 𝜙 are measured, the curve
of intensity per unit wavelength as a
∗ function of wavelength 𝜆 has two peaks: one
centred at 𝜆0 , the wavelength of the incident
X rays, and another at
′
ℎ
𝜆 = 𝜆0 + 1 − cos 𝜙 ., ∗
𝑚𝑒 𝑐

ℎ
= 2.424 × 10−12 m
𝑚𝑒 𝑐

31
 For his discovery of the positron, Carl David
Anderson is awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics 1936.

Pair production

Sears & Zemansky’s University Physics, 14th edition, by Hugh D. Young and Roger A. Freedman, Chapter 38, Section 3
Modern Physics, 2nd edition, by Randy Harris, Chapter 3, Section 5

32
Pair production (1933)

𝛾 → 𝑒− + 𝑒+

If a gamma-ray photon of sufficiently short wavelength 𝜆 is fired at a target, it may not

scatter – it may instead disappear completely and be replaced by two new particles (such as
an electron 𝑒 − and a positron 𝑒 + ) – pair production. The electron and positron have to
be produced in pairs in order to conserve electric charge.

Note that the gamma-ray photon cannot become an electron-positron pair in vacuum –
linear momentum could not be conserved.

33
Pair production (cont.)

“Proof”: Suppose a gamma-ray photon could become an electron-positron pair in vacuum.

By conservation of energy,
ℎ𝑐
= 𝐸𝑒 − + 𝐸𝑒 + , 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝐸𝑒2± = 𝑃𝑒2± 𝑐 2 + 𝑚𝑒2 𝑐 4 .
𝜆
By conservation of linear momentum,
ℎ
= 𝑃𝑒 − cos 𝜃𝑒 − + 𝑃𝑒 + cos 𝜃𝑒 + , 0 = 𝑃𝑒 − sin 𝜃𝑒 − − 𝑃𝑒 + sin 𝜃𝑒 + .
𝜆
It follows that
2
ℎ
= 𝑃𝑒2− + 2𝑃𝑒 − 𝑃𝑒 + cos 𝜃𝑒 − + 𝜃𝑒 + + 𝑃𝑒2+ ≤ 𝑃𝑒 − + 𝑃𝑒 + 2
𝜆
which is incompatible with
2 2
ℎ 𝐸𝑒 − 𝐸𝑒 +
= + .
𝜆 𝑐 𝑐 34
Pair production (cont.)

Remarks.
o Clearly, linear momentum is not conserved if a gamma-ray photon becomes two
stationary massive particles, e.g., where 𝑃𝑒 − = 𝑃𝑒 + = 0.
o We have demonstrated that even if the photon were more energetic, allowing the pair
some kinetic energy after their creation, linear momentum could not be conserved.
o What actually happens is that the gamma-ray photon passes a massive particle, such as
an atomic nucleus, they interact, some linear momentum is transferred to the nucleus,
and a pair is created.
o Although linear momentum cannot be conserved without it, the nucleus “steals” little
energy!

For example, ignoring momentum conservation, to produce a stationary electron-positron

pair, the gamma-ray photon must have at least enough energy to account for the rest energy
2𝑚𝑒 𝑐 2 of the two particles.
35
Pair production (cont.)

𝐸𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 2𝑚𝑒 𝑐 2 ≈ 2 9.109 × 10−31 kg 2.998 × 108 mΤs 2

≈ 1.637 × 10−13 J
Gamma-ray photon with this energy has linear momentum
1
𝑝𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 𝐸𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≈ 5.462 × 10−22 kg ⋅ mΤs .
𝑐
A lead nucleus has (rest) mass 𝑀 ≈ 3.5 × 10−25 kg. Assuming the gamma-ray photon
transfers all its linear momentum to the lead nucleus, i.e., 𝑃 = 𝑝𝑚𝑖𝑛 , then
𝑃 2𝑐2 𝑃 2
𝐸 2 = 𝑃2 𝑐 2 + 𝑀2 𝑐 4 ⇒ 𝐸 − 𝑀𝑐 2 = 2
≈
𝐸 + 𝑀𝑐 2𝑀
since
2
𝑃2 𝑐 2 = 𝑝𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑐 2 ≈ 2.681 × 10−26 ≪ 9.896 × 10−16 ≈ 𝑀2 𝑐 4 .
2
Therefore, 𝐸 − 𝑀𝑐 2 𝑃2 𝑝𝑚𝑖𝑛 −6
≈ = 2
≈ 2.603 × 10 .
𝐸𝑚𝑖𝑛 2𝑀𝐸𝑚𝑖𝑛 4𝑀𝑚𝑒 𝑐
36
Wave – particle duality

Sears & Zemansky’s University Physics, 14th edition, by Hugh D. Young and Roger A. Freedman, Chapter 38, Section 4

37
Wave–particle duality means that light has two aspects that seem to be in direct conflict.

Wave description: Particle description:

𝐸 = 𝐸0 sin(𝑘𝑥 − 𝜔𝑡) Photon momentum

ℎ ℎ 2𝜋
Here 𝑝𝑥 = = = ℏ𝑘
𝜆 2𝜋 𝜆
Photon energy
𝑘 = 2𝜋/𝜆 and 𝜔 = 2𝜋𝑓
ℎ
𝐸 = ℎ𝑓 = 2𝜋𝑓 = ℏ𝜔
2𝜋
Here ℏ = ℎ/2𝜋
How can light be a wave and a particle at the same time?

Principle of complementarity (Niels Bohr, 1928)

The wave descriptions and the particle descriptions are complementary. We need both to
complete our model of nature, but we will never need to use both at the same time to describe
a single part of an occurrence.
38
Wave – particle duality example

Example: Two slit interference experiment in the

photon picture.

Interference pattern tells us the probability that any

individual photon will land at a given spot. We can’t
predict where the next photon will be detected. We
can just predict probabilities.
 For his discovery of the wave nature of electrons,
Prince Louis-Victor Pierre Raymond de Broglie is
awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics 1929.

The wave nature of electrons

For their experimental discovery of the diffraction of
electrons by crystals, Clinton Joseph Davisson and
George Paget Thomson are awarded the Nobel Prize in
Physics 1937.

Sears & Zemansky’s University Physics, 14th edition, by Hugh D. Young and Roger A. Freedman, Chapter 39, Section 1
Modern Physics, 2nd edition, by Randy Harris, Chapter 4, Section 2

40
The electron

In recognition of the great merits of his theoretical and

experimental investigations on the conduction of
electricity by gases, Joseph John Thomson is awarded the
1906 Nobel Prize in Physics. The subject of elementary
particle physics may be said to have begun with his
discovery of the negatively charged electron in 1897 (120
year ago). 18 𝐷𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 1856 − 30 𝐴𝑢𝑔𝑢𝑠𝑡 1940

2 2
1 𝑒 𝑣 𝐸
𝑚𝑣 2 = 𝑒𝑉 ⇒ = =
2 𝑚 2𝑉 2𝑉𝐵2

41
 Thomson experiment
The electron (1897) proved that the
rays emitted from the
cathode were negatively
charged particles
(electrons) by deflecting
them in electric
and magnetic fields. He
was able to determine
charge-to-mass ratio 𝑒/𝑚
of the electron.

In 1911 Robert A.
Millikan measured the
electron charge in his “oil
drop” experiment.
42
The de Broglie hypothesis (1924)

o Nature loves symmetry. Light is dualistic in nature, behaving in some situations like
waves and in others like particles. If nature is symmetric, this duality should also hold
for matter. Electrons, which we usually think of as particles, may in some situations
behave like waves.
o De Broglie postulated that a free particle of mass 𝑚 with a definite linear momentum 𝑝
should have a wavelength: the de Broglie wavelength,
ℎ
𝜆= ,
𝑝
in exactly the same way as for a photon.
o This relationship has been confirmed beyond any doubt, even for relativistic speeds 𝑣
(where 𝑝 = 𝛾𝑚𝑣), by experiments such as crystal diffraction, in which the momentum 𝑝
of the electrons in a beam is known, and analysis of the pattern establishes the wavelength
𝜆.
43
Electron diffraction

𝑝2
= 𝑒𝑉𝑏𝑎 ⇒ 𝑝 = 2𝑚𝑒𝑉𝑏𝑎
2𝑚

In 1927, the American physicists C. J. Davisson and L. H. Germer directed a beam of

electrons at the surface of a piece of nickel that was baked in a high-temperature oven.
Baking the sample created large regions within the nickel with crystal planes that were
continuous over the width of the electron beam. From the perspective of the electrons, the
sample looked like a single crystal of nickel:

44
Electron diffraction (cont.)

𝜃1

𝜃1
“Electron wave” scattered from two adjacent
atoms interfere constructively when
They observed that strong maxima in the 𝑑 sin 𝜃𝑚 = 𝑚𝜆, 𝑚 = 1, 2, 3, ⋯
intensity of the scattered electron beam with
occurred at specific angles, similar to X-ray
ℎ ℎ
diffraction. That is, the electron beam was 𝜆= = .
being diffracted. 𝑝 2𝑚𝑒𝑉𝑏𝑎
𝑑 can be measured independently by X-ray
diffraction techniques. 45
When electrons interact with matter

o Diffraction.

𝜃1

𝑑 sin 𝜃𝑚 = 𝑚𝜆, 𝑚 = 1, 2, 3, ⋯ 𝑑 sin 𝜃𝑛 = 𝑛𝜆, 𝑛 = 1, 2, 3, ⋯

𝑅𝑒𝑓𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑇𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛
Electron diffraction (cont.)

Remark.
In 1928, just a year after the Davisson-Germer discovery, the English physicist G. P.
Thomson (son of J. J. Thomson) carried out electron-diffraction experiments using a thin,
polycrystalline, metallic foil as target. In these experiments the beam passes through the
target rather than being reflected from it. Because of the random orientations of the
individual microscopic crystals in the foil, the diffraction pattern consists of intensity
maxima forming rings around the direction of the incident beam:

X-ray diffraction pattern for 71 × 10−12 m X-rays passing

through a polycrystalline aluminium foil.
Electron diffraction pattern for 600 eV electrons from a
polycrystalline aluminium foil, with a different scale. The
similarity shows that electrons undergo the same kind of
diffraction as X-rays. Thomson’s results again confirmed the de
Broglie relationship. 47
Experiment 3, Electron diffraction. Try it yourself in the lab
 Two-slit interference of electrons

http://www.hitachi.com/rd/portal/highlight/quantum/doubleslit/index.html

Directing an electron beam at two parallel slits produces exactly the same kind of
interference pattern for two-slit interference of photons:

49
Electron microscope

The resolution of the imagine system is limited by

the wavelength of the radiation used to illuminate
the sample. We can’t see features smaller than 𝜆

For visible light in optical microscope,

𝜆 = 400 − 700 nm

For electron microscope with 1 keV electrons,

ℎ
𝜆= = 0.04 nm
2𝑒𝑉𝑚
Electron microscope

J.I. Goldstein et al., eds., Scanning Electron

Microscopy and X-Ray Microanalysis,
Why we do not look like a wave

For a human (mass m=100kg and velocity v=1 m/s)

ℎ
𝜆ℎ = = 6 × 10−36 m
𝑚𝑣

For a mosquito, (mass 2.5×10−6 kg, velocity v=0.1 m/s)

ℎ
𝜆𝑚 = = 2.5 × 10−27 m
𝑚𝑣

For comparison, size of an atom is ∼ 10−10 m

 5 𝐷𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 1901 − 1 𝐹𝑒𝑏𝑟𝑢𝑎𝑟𝑦 1976

The Heisenberg uncertainty principle

1
Δ𝑥 𝜓 Δ𝑝 𝜓 ≥ ℏ
2

Sears & Zemansky’s University Physics, 14th edition, by Hugh D. Young and Roger A. Freedman, Chapter 38, Section 4; Chapter 39, Section 6
Modern Physics, 2nd edition, by Randy Harris, Chapter 4, Sections 4 & 5, 7

53
Wave – particle duality

We can’t treat photons or electrons as classical particles, there is a fundamental limit on the
precision with which we can simultaneously determine the position and momentum of a
photon
Example: Due to diffraction:
𝜆
sin 𝜃1 ≃ 𝜃1 =
𝑎
Therefore uncertainty of 𝑝𝑦

Δ𝑝𝑦 = 𝜃1 𝑝𝑥 = 𝜆𝑝𝑥 /𝑎

But
𝑝𝑥 = ℎ/𝜆
Therefore
Δ𝑝𝑦 𝑎 = ℎ
Expectation values and uncertainties

Suppose repeated experiments are carried out to determine a quantity 𝑄, where 𝑄 might
represent position 𝑥, linear momentum 𝑝, or any other measureable quantity. The value 𝑄1
is obtained 𝑛1 times, the value 𝑄2 is obtained 𝑛2 times, and so on. The expectation value
(or mean) of 𝑄,
1
𝑄 = ෍ 𝑛𝑖 𝑄𝑖 , 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑁 = ෍ 𝑛𝑖 .
𝑁
𝑖 𝑖
Clearly,
𝑛𝑖 1
𝑝𝑖 = ≥ 0, ෍ 𝑝𝑖 = ෍ 𝑛𝑖 = 1, 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑄 = ෍ 𝑝𝑖 𝑄𝑖 .
𝑁 𝑁
𝑖 𝑖 𝑖
And,

𝑄− 𝑄 = ෍ 𝑝𝑖 𝑄𝑖 − 𝑄 = ෍ 𝑝𝑖 𝑄𝑖 − 𝑄 ෍ 𝑝𝑖 = 𝑄 − 𝑄 = 0.
𝑖 𝑖 𝑖 55
Expectation values and uncertainties (cont.)

But,

𝑄− 𝑄 2
= ෍ 𝑝𝑖 𝑄𝑖 − 𝑄 2
= ෍ 𝑝𝑖 𝑄𝑖2 − 2 𝑄 𝑄𝑖 + 𝑄 2

𝑖 𝑖

= ෍ 𝑝𝑖 𝑄𝑖2 − 2 𝑄 ෍ 𝑝𝑖 𝑄𝑖 + 𝑄 2෍𝑝
𝑖 = 𝑄2 − 𝑄 2 ≥ 0.
𝑖 𝑖 𝑖
The standard deviation,
Δ𝑄 = 𝑄− 𝑄 2 ,
is zero if and only if there is only one value ever obtained, which would automatically be
𝑄 , and when values do vary, it gets larger as they become more spread out. In quantifies
the uncertainty in 𝑄 when the experiment to determine 𝑄 is repeated many times,
identically.

56
 The Heisenberg uncertainty principle

If coordinate has uncertainty Δ𝑥 ,

and corresponding momentum
component 𝑝𝑥 has an uncertainty
Δ𝑝𝑥 than in general
1
Δ𝑥 Δ𝑝𝑥 ≥ ℏ
2
Here
ℎ
ℏ= = 1.0545716 × 10−34 J ⋅ s
2𝜋
It is impossible to get better precision even in
principle because detector must interacts
with the particle, if it gives more precise
value of x, it introduces more uncertainty in
𝑝𝑥 , and wise versa
Another way to understand the Heisenberg uncertainty principle

Reminder: Photon wave equation:

𝐸 = 𝐴 sin 𝑘𝑥 − 𝜔𝑡 = 𝐴 sin[(𝑝𝑥 𝑥 − 𝐸𝑡)/ℏ]

Where photon momentum

ℎ ℎ 2𝜋
𝑝𝑥 = = = ℏ𝑘
𝜆 2𝜋 𝜆
And photon energy
ℎ
𝐸 = ℎ𝑓 = 2𝜋𝑓 = ℏ𝜔
2𝜋

Since 𝑝𝑥 has the well defined value, particle is not localized, it can be found anywhere. We
have no idea where the photon is
Another way to understand the Heisenberg uncertainty principle

If we add together two waves with slightly

different momentum 𝑝𝑥

𝑝1𝑥 𝑥 − 𝐸𝑡 𝑝2𝑥 𝑥 − 𝐸𝑡
𝐴1 sin + 𝐴2 sin
ℏ ℏ

Photon become more localised,

But the momentum 𝑝𝑥 is not fixed any more

Uncertainty for time and energy

At x=0

𝐸1 𝑡 𝐸2 𝑡 t
−𝐴1 sin − 𝐴2 sin
ℏ ℏ

If we measure combination of two oscillating t

fields with slightly different frequencies, the
photon is now localized in time. Heisenberg uncertainty relation
for time and energy
It takes some time to distinguish 2
frequencies which are close to each other
Δ𝑡 Δ𝐸 ≥ ℏ/2
If some state is occupied for time Δ𝑡 ,
uncertainty of its energy is Δ𝐸