Hello David,
yes and no. You are of course right about the wavelengths. What I meant
earlier was the fact that a photon has to have just the right energy to
excite an electron in a shell of an atom. If the gap to the next level
is, say, 0.25 eV, and your photon has 0.30eV, there is a good chance
nothing will happen at all in a statistically relevant number. That is
the nature of quantum physics. Photons can either interact or not
interact, at least in this setting at these energies.
What I completely forgot, though, is what John pointed out. 60eV is the
range of the ionization energy, sure. But we do not need to knock out an
electron from the very core, it is enough to knock out an electron from
a higher shell that has an energy that is closer to zero. So ordinary
light, including many many wavelengths, will provide the necessary
photon for some of these transitions. We won't need a 60eV photon for
that. I stand corrected :-)
Jens
A photon is a photon; the energy it has is inversely proportional to the
wavelength. A blue LED is shorter wavelength than the orange Nixie glow, so it
ought to work. At least that's one thing I remember from physics class.
David Forbes
http://www.cathodecorner.com/
On Jan 30, 2012, at 3:11 PM, Cobra007<[email protected]> wrote:
Humm, that is interesting and for sure I am going to measure that. If
I put the tubes in a permanent dark room, they should then strike
quicker during the day and slower during the night.
At the same time, I can see if lighting the backlight LEDs will bring
any change in that. It could be that many 3eV particles will have a
similar result as a few 60eV particles, it's all in quantum mechanics
I suppose.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"neonixie-l" group.
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/neonixie-l?hl=en-GB.
