What is the mass of a particle with speed 2.7 x 10\(^8\)m/s and wavelength 4.0 x 10\(^{-7}\)mm? (h = 6.63 x 10\(^{-34}\)Js)

Answer Details

This question uses de Broglie's idea that a moving particle has a wavelength linked to its momentum: \[\lambda = \frac{h}{p} = \frac{h}{mv},\] so that \[m = \frac{h}{\lambda v}.\] Everything therefore depends on getting the wavelength into metres, because \(h\) is in \(\text{J s}\) and the speed in \(\text{m s}^{-1}\).

The wavelength is given in millimetres, so convert first: \[\lambda = 4.0 \times 10^{-7}\ \text{mm} = 4.0 \times 10^{-7} \times 10^{-3}\ \text{m} = 4.0 \times 10^{-10}\ \text{m}.\] Now substitute: \[m = \frac{6.63 \times 10^{-34}}{(4.0 \times 10^{-10})(2.7 \times 10^{8})} = \frac{6.63 \times 10^{-34}}{1.08 \times 10^{-1}} = 6.1 \times 10^{-33}\ \text{kg}.\] The significant figures come out as 6.1, so the intended choice is the value quoted with those figures; its power of ten appears to be misprinted, since the correct working gives \(6.1 \times 10^{-33}\ \text{kg}\) rather than \(10^{-31}\). Quote \(6.1 \times 10^{-33}\ \text{kg}\) as your worked answer and select the value beginning 6.1.

The step that costs most marks is the millimetre-to-metre conversion. Skipping it, and using \(4.0 \times 10^{-7}\ \text{m}\), gives \(6.1 \times 10^{-36}\ \text{kg}\), a thousand times too small. A second slip is inverting the relation and multiplying by \(\lambda v\) instead of dividing. As a check on the physics, remember the inverse proportionality: a shorter wavelength means a larger momentum, so a heavier or faster particle always has the smaller de Broglie wavelength, which is why wave behaviour is only observed for very light particles such as electrons.