John Isner holds the ATP's (Association of Tennis Professionals) official record for the fastest serve at 253 km/h. Calculate the de Broglie wavelength of a tennis ball with the standard weight of 58.8 grams. Give your answer in 10^(-34) m (for example, if your answer is 5.6x10^(-34) m, then enter 5.6). This should give you a good idea of why one cannot expect to observe interference affects using tennis balls rather then, for example, electrons.

Alex Baird 2022-07-22 Answered
John Isner holds the ATP's (Association of Tennis Professionals) official record for the fastest serve at 253 km/h. Calculate the de Broglie wavelength of a tennis ball with the standard weight of 58.8 grams. Give your answer in 10 34 m (for example, if your answer is 5.6 × 10 34 m, then enter 5.6). This should give you a good idea of why one cannot expect to observe interference affects using tennis balls rather then, for example, electrons.
You can still ask an expert for help

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

Solve your problem for the price of one coffee

  • Available 24/7
  • Math expert for every subject
  • Pay only if we can solve it
Ask Question

Answers (1)

Abraham Norris
Answered 2022-07-23 Author has 16 answers
Given data:
The velocity is v=253 km/h.
Mass of tennis ball is m=58.8 g.
The De Broglie's equation for wavelength is,
λ = h m v
Here, h is Plank's constant whose value is 6.626 × 10 34 J s .
Substitute all values in above equation,
λ = 6.626 × 10 34 k g m 2 / s 58.8 g × 1 k g 1000 g × 253 k m / h × 5 m / s 18 k m / h λ = 1.6 × 10 34 m
Thus, the wavelength is 1.6 × 10 34 m .
The answer will be 1.6.
Not exactly what you’re looking for?
Ask My Question

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

You might be interested in

asked 2022-06-01

A vase on a potter's wheel experiences an angular acceleration of 8.0 rad/s2 due to the application of a 12.0N.m net torque. Find the total moment of inertia of the vase and potter's wheel 

asked 2022-04-12
The temperature of the surface of the sun
If I calculate the temperature of the Sun by replacing the effective frequency of the Sun (598 THz) in Planck's curve for Blackbody radiation, the result will be 10170 K. Still, in Wien's displacement law, the result will be 5778 K, is there an answer for this problem?
asked 2022-05-20
Why is the de Broglie equation as well as the Schrodinger equation is correct for massive particle?
Starting from special relativity, here I see the de Broglie approximation is valid only if m 0 = 0
Derivation:
E 2 = P 2 C 2 + m 0 2 C 4 . Here we put Plank-Einstein relation E = h ν = h C λ . Finally,
λ = h P 2 + m 0 2 C 2 ( 1 )
If m 0 = 0 then λ = h p (de Broglie approximation).
Furthermore we know the Schrodinger equation was derived by assuming that the de Broglie approximation is true for all particles, even if m 0 0. But if we take special relativity very strictly then this approximation looks incorrect.
In addition, if we try to derive the Schrodinger equation from the exact relation found in '1', we find completely different equation. For checking it out, lets take a wave function-
Ψ = A e i ( 2 π λ x ω t ) = A e i ( P 2 + m 0 2 C 2 x E t ) (putting λ from '1', h 2 π = and E = ω).
Then, 2 Ψ x 2 = P 2 + m 0 2 C 2 2 Ψ = E 2 C 2 2 Ψ
E 2 Ψ = C 2 2 2 Ψ x 2 ( 2 )
Again, Ψ t = i E Ψ E Ψ = i Ψ t
Here we see operator E = i t E 2 = 2 2 t 2
E 2 Ψ = 2 2 Ψ t 2 ( 3 )
Combining (2) and (3) we find the differential equation:
2 Ψ x 2 = 1 C 2 2 Ψ t 2
It is the Maxwell's equation, not the well known Schrodiner equation!
Therefore for the Schrodinger equation to exist, the de Broglie approximation must hold for m 0 0. I see a clear contradiction here. Then why is the Schrodinger equation correct after all?
asked 2022-05-15
De Broglie wavelength of an electron
If an electron which already possesses some kinetic energy of X e V is further accelerated through a potential difference of X V, then is it correct to state that the electron now has a total kinetic energy of ( X + X ) e V? Using this information, am I allowed to substitute this value in the de Broglie equation to find the wavelength of the electron?
asked 2022-07-16
JC-23) de Broglie Waves A photon and a particle have the same wavelength.
a) How do their linear momenta compare?
b) How does the photon's energy compare to the particle's total energy?
c) How does the photon's energy compare to the particle's kinetic energy?
asked 2022-05-03
Deriving photon energy equation using E = m c 2 and de Broglie wavelength
So I was learning de Broglie wavelength today in my physics class, and I started playing around with it. I wondered if it was possible to calculate the energy of a light wave given its wavelength and speed. After rearranging a bit, I plugged it into E = m c 2 , and realized I had found the equation for the energy of a photon that I learned at the beginning of my quantum mechanics unit, E = h f
λ = h p
p = h λ
E = m c 2
E = p c c 2
E = h c λ = h f
I have a few questions about this. Firstly, I do not understand how it can make sense to do p c in this context, because, as I understand it, light has no mass. How can I come to E = h f using the mass of a massless object?
Secondly, as I was doing those steps, I thought I would be calculating the energy of the entire light ray. I now realize I was finding the energy of a single photon. In hindsight, this makes sense, because the energy of the entire light ray must depend on some length value, correct?
This led me to two other questions: do light rays have some finite length? how do I calculate the energy of a light ray, not just a single photon?
asked 2022-04-30
Deriving Wien's displacement law (Zettili)
According to Zettili, we can derive Wien's displacement law from Planck's energy density
u ~ ( λ , T ) = 8 π h c λ 5 1 e h c / k T λ 1
where λ is the wavelength and T is the temperature. Taking the derivative of this, setting it equal to zero, and rearranging terms, one gets
α λ = 5 ( 1 e α / λ )
where α = h c / ( k T ). To solve this, Zettili goes on to say that we can write
α λ = 5 ϵ
so that the previously mentioned equation becomes
5 ϵ = 5 5 e 5 + ϵ
Apparently, ϵ 5 e 5 is a good answer. My first question is why do we use 5 ϵ to rewrite the equation? What method is this? I've never seen that before and other resources just say that they got the values by solving numerically. My second question is why ϵ 5 e 5 when there is an extra factor of e ϵ in the equation? Why can we ignore that factor?

New questions