Page 1 of 1

### Car Example in Class with De Brogile Equation

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 2:47 pm
What is the exact reason that the car does not have any wavelength properties even though it is moving?

### Re: Car Example in Class with De Brogile Equation

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 3:09 pm
What is the exact reason that the car does not have any wavelength properties even though it is moving?

The car does not have any wavelength properties because the wavelength was too small. The professor mentioned how it was even smaller than the gamma rays. I think he said that the smallest wavelength to consider would 10^-18, this would be the smallest wavelength to be considered having wavelength properties.

### Re: Car Example in Class with De Brogile Equation

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 3:23 pm
As the mass increases, the denominator in the equation λ=h/mv increases which in turn decreases its wavelength because λ is a constant.

Do you know why 10^-18 specifically? Is it because it is the smallest wavelength that is detectable by most instruments?

Thanks

### Re: Car Example in Class with De Brogile Equation

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 3:26 pm
I think your reasoning is correct, that detectors cannot read wavelengths less than 10^-18 meters long. If you put things into perspective, Professor also talked about how the length of bonds between atoms in a microscopic scale is measured in Angstroms, which are 10^-10. 10^-18 is an extremely small wavelength.

### Re: Car Example in Class with De Brogile Equation

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 3:26 pm
I think your reasoning is correct, that detectors cannot read wavelengths less than 10^-18 meters long. If you put things into perspective, Professor also talked about how the length of bonds between atoms in a microscopic scale is measured in Angstroms, which are 10^-10. 10^-18 is an extremely small wavelength.

### Re: Car Example in Class with De Brogile Equation

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 7:21 pm
Kevin Tang 4E wrote:As the mass increases, the denominator in the equation λ=h/mv increases which in turn decreases its wavelength because λ is a constant.

Do you know why 10^-18 specifically? Is it because it is the smallest wavelength that is detectable by most instruments?

Thanks

It is not 10^-18 specifically but the professor did say that in order to be safe when determining if the object displays wavelength properties or not we should use. I believe he gave the range from 10^-12 to 10^-18 during lecture but said to go with 10^-18 to be safe. In general though he said wavelengths will be more obvious and not be in the range of 10^-12 to 10^-18 typically and be even smaller to 10^-34 etc. The important thing to note though is that 10^-10 does display wavelength properties due to the Ångström.

### Re: Car Example in Class with De Brogile Equation

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 11:25 pm
I think what Professor Lavelle meant by the car having non-wavelength properties was that the car's wavelength was 10^-34 and so he would consider it to be safe the wavelength was around 10^-10 or an angstrom. This would make sense because anything much smaller than this would result it in having such a small wavelength that it would be near if not impossible to detect.

### Re: Car Example in Class with De Brogile Equation

Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2018 3:39 pm
I think the car has no wavelength properties because something with a mass so large would produce a very small wavelength according to the equation. In the car's case, the wavelength would be so small that would be unmeasurable.

### Re: Car Example in Class with De Brogile Equation

Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 11:00 am
Do you guys recall how small he said that the objects would no longer have frequency?