PLEASE ANSWER ASAP

How do the dark lines of an atom''s absorption spectrum relate to the bright lines of its emission spectrum?

tangare [24]

Wouldn't it be neat if an electron falling closer to the nucleus ... emitting a
photon ... actually gave out more energy than it needed to climb to its original
energy level by absorbing a photon ! If there were some miraculous substance
that could do that, we'd have it made.

All we'd need is a pile of it in our basement, with a bright light bulb over the pile,
connected to a tiny hand-crank generator.

Whenever we wanted some energy, like for cooking or heating the house, we'd
switch the light bulb on, point it towards the pile, and give the little generator a
little shove. It wouldn't take much to git 'er going.

The atoms in the pile would absorb some photons, raising their electrons to higher
energy levels. Then the electrons would fall back down to lower energy levels,
releasing more energy than they needed to climb up. We could take that energy,
use some of it to keep the light bulb shining on the pile, and use the extra to heat
the house or run the dishwasher.

The energy an electron absorbs when it climbs to a higher energy level (forming
the atom's absorption spectrum) is precisely identical to the energy it emits when
it falls back to its original level (creating the atom's emission spectrum).

Energy that wasn't either there in the atom to begin with or else pumped
into it from somewhere can't be created there.

You get what you pay for, or, as my grandfather used to say, "For nothing
you get nothing."

3 0

2 years ago

What event was seen as a symbol of the gradual relationship improvements between the United States and the Soviet Union as the C

Olegator [25]

Answer:

I think the answer is b but i cannot confirm cuz this is a challenging question

4 0

2 years ago

A ball has a mass of 1.5kg and is thrown straight up with a speed of 60m/s, what is the ball’s momentum:

madam [21]

Answer:

Assumption: the air resistance on this ball is negligible. Take $g = 10\; \rm m \cdot s^{-2}$ .

a. The momentum of the ball would be approximately $60\;\rm kg \cdot m \cdot s^{-1}$ two seconds after it is tossed into the air.

b. The momentum of the ball would be approximately $\rm \left(-45\; \rm kg \cdot m \cdot s^{-1}\right)$ three seconds after it reaches the highest point (assuming that it didn't hit the ground.) This momentum is smaller than zero because it points downwards.

Explanation:

The momentum $p$ of an object is equal its mass $m$ times its velocity $v$ . That is: $\vec{p} = m \cdot \vec{v}$ .

Assume that the air resistance on this ball is negligible. If that's the case, then the ball would accelerate downwards towards the ground at a constant $g \approx -10\; \rm m \cdot s^{-2}$ . In other words, its velocity would become approximately $10\; \rm m \cdot s^{-1}$ more negative every second.

The initial velocity of the ball is $60\; \rm m \cdot s^{-1}$ . After two seconds, its velocity would have become $60\;\rm m \cdot s^{-1} + 2\; \rm s \times \left(-10\;\rm m \cdot s^{-1}\right) = 40\; \rm m \cdot s^{-1}$ . The momentum of the ball at that time would be around $p = m \cdot v \approx 60\; \rm kg \cdot m \cdot s^{-1}$ .

When the ball is at the highest point of its trajectory, the velocity of the ball would be zero. However, the ball would continue to accelerate downwards towards the ground at a constant $g \approx -10\; \rm m \cdot s^{-2}$ . That's how the ball's velocity becomes negative.

After three more seconds, the velocity of the ball would be $0\; \rm m \cdot s^{-1} + 3\; \rm s \times \left(-10\; \rm m \cdot s^{-2}\right) = -30 \; \rm m \cdot s^{-1}$ . Accordingly, the ball's momentum at that moment would be $p = m \cdot v \approx \left(-45\; \rm kg \cdot m \cdot s^{-1}\right)$ .