| 
		  
			| GR9677 #40 |  |  
			| 
		
		|  |  
		| 
			
				| Alternate Solutions |  
				| 
				| BerkeleyEric 2010-09-22 22:36:21
 | I think process of elimination is fastest here. From the Bohr formula we know that the n=1 is at 4*(-13.6 eV) ~ -52 eV. So it can't be (D). And it also can't be (B) since the n=2 state wouldn't be all the way up at -6 eV. 
 Now remember that 470 nm falls in the visible regime, so the energy difference must be at around 1-2 eV. This immediately eliminates (C) and (E) since they must be more than this amount lower than the n=4 state.
 |  |  | archard 2010-07-15 13:50:25
 | You can also get it with the Rydberg formula, since you're given the wavelength of the photon and the initial energy level. Then it's just plug and chug. |  |  |  
			
				| Comments |  
				| 
				| cczako 2013-10-18 15:21:38
 | The way I did was to just remember that  E is proportional to Z^2/n^2. Its quick and easy to calculate that n=4 --> E=- 3 eV, n=3 --> E=-6 eV, n=2 --> E=-13.6 eV, and n=1 --> E=-50 eV.  This automatically eliminates B and D. Then using the equation E=(hc)/lambda (I always use 1240 nm*eV for hc) you get that 470 nm is about 3 eV. So n=4 of energy -3 eV minus 3 eV gives you -6 eV. This gives you choice A. |  |  | BerkeleyEric 2010-09-22 22:36:21
 | I think process of elimination is fastest here. From the Bohr formula we know that the n=1 is at 4*(-13.6 eV) ~ -52 eV. So it can't be (D). And it also can't be (B) since the n=2 state wouldn't be all the way up at -6 eV. 
 Now remember that 470 nm falls in the visible regime, so the energy difference must be at around 1-2 eV. This immediately eliminates (C) and (E) since they must be more than this amount lower than the n=4 state.
 |  |  | archard 2010-07-15 13:50:25
 | You can also get it with the Rydberg formula, since you're given the wavelength of the photon and the initial energy level. Then it's just plug and chug. 
											
											
											| sina2 2013-09-24 02:17:02
 | I tried in this way, but I failed. 
 |  
											
											
											| nasim 2015-10-12 17:05:01
 | One should first have the Rydberg constant to be able to use Rydberg formula! But doesn\'t! 
 |  |  |  | asdfman 2009-11-05 00:37:16
 | You can quickly narrow this down as anything less than ~400 nm is UV. If you remember that 13.6 eV, from hydrogen yields UV then that tosses out choices C, D, and E. |  |  | f4hy 2009-10-25 19:28:33
 | I am confused. When finding  are you using the speed of light in cm but the wave length in meters? 
											
											
											| kroner 2009-10-29 14:13:19
 | Everything is in meters there. 
  eV m or 1240 eV nm, which good value to know off-hand for problems like this.
 
 |  |  |  | astro_allison 2005-12-08 22:50:07
 | don't you mean  ? |  |  |  |  |  | 
  
    | The Sidebar Chatbox... Scroll to see it, or resize your browser to ignore it...
 |  
    |  |  |