Rydberg equation

[Jacob Motawakel]

Why are we not allowed to use the Rydberg equation frequency = R( 1/n1^2 - 1/n2^2)?

[FDeCastro_1B]

I don't think it's that we're not allowed to. Just that Lavelle would prefer that we use -hR/n1^2.

[Jacob Puchalski 1G]

Why is that preferred?

[Deena Doan 2F]

It's preferred because it is easier to understand conceptually with the way he taught us in class.

[Vanessa Chuang 4F]

The Rydberg equation doesn't show different energy levels and how to conceptually get from one level to another one. Thus, it's easy to either get mixed up with emission vs absorption or to just completely forget to concepts behind the formula.

[Jialun Chen 4F]

You can use that equation, but the energy version that's given by Dr. Lavelle explains the concept better for me.

[Jainam Shah 4I]

The equation you stated is a derivation of -hr/nfinal^2 - (-hr/ninitial^2). If you factor out the -hr you should get an equation similar to what you posted. As the others stated the equation we learned in class is easier to see conceptually.

[Shutong Hou_1F]

We are actually totally allowed to use the Rydberg equation, whereas using the (final - initial) form of the the Rydberg equation could give us a better understanding of the concept and therefore what we are doing. And I believe that using the form of equation recommended by professor Lavelle eliminates the probability of confusing the final state with the initial state.

[Jialun Chen 4F]

You're allowed to use both, yet it depends on which one explains the concept better for you.

[905416023]

I think we're not allowed to because it doesn't fully show out the concept. This class is very conceptual, therefore the whole concept of each problem is expected to be shown in our work.