The photoelectric effect supports the particle model. This doesn't mean the particle model is "right" and the wave model is "wrong", just that in this particular experiment, the particle model better explains the observed results.
Yes, it does. And before you react to the "wise guy" answer, let's look at what's happening in photoelectric effect. By the time we're done with a simple explanation, you'll see that this phenomenon deals with both particles and waves. Light is energy. It's electromagnetic energy, to be more precise. And when this energy, which is carried by a photon, impinges on a material, the energy can be transferred to the electrons around the atoms of the material. These electrons, which are particles, take that energy and escape from atoms with it. They (the electrons) are kicked into higher Fermi energy levels and this sets up the conditions for the application of this principle to the generation of electricity. By selecting certain materials and making a suitable structure, we can create a photovoltaic cell. Those electrons that were kicked out can be harnessed, and this cell, when exposed to light, will generate voltage, or electromagnetic force. The voltage, this photovoltaic energy, can be applied in all the ways "regular" electricity can be used. A link can be found below. A link can be found below for more information.
The photoelectric effect supports the particle model.
That doesn't mean the particle model is "right" and the wave model is "wrong".
The electromagnetic phenomena involved in light have properties of both models.
In this particular experiment, the particle model better explains the observed results.
The photon or particle form. A single photon reacting with a single electron.
The photo-electric effect depends on the particle nature of light.
At the simplest level it was the Bohr model.
The blueberry muffin model said that the particles of the atom are evenly distributed through a positively charged medium. The gold foil experiment showed that some rays were deflected, indicating a mass capable of deflecting the rays projected through the gold foil, thus disproving the muffin model.
There are to possible answers to this question... If what you are mixing is light (like the TV/Monitors does)... or if what you are mixing pigments (like inks, crayons, etc)... In the case of light, Red Light and Green Light will give you Yellow Light... (for example when you are working with the RGB system you have to look at it like this... this is called Additive Colors) In the case of inks, (for example the CMYK color model, that will be called Subtractive Colors) The resulting color will be a shade of brown.
Atomic model of DemocritusAtomic model of DaltonAtomic model of ThomsonAtomic model of RutherfordAtomic model of BohrAtomic model of SommerfeldSchrödinger model
Now, an advanced model derived from the Niels Bohr theory.
The photoelectric effect is a phenomena that can only be explained by the particle model.
The particle model of light entails that light consists of tiny packages of energy called photons. Because light is an electromagnetic wave the model is a part of the general model for electromagnetism. This model is called Quantum Electrodynamics, or QED in short.
The Photoelectric Effect and the Compton effect, both of these effects are explained by Photons.
Albert Einstein in his 1905 paper on the photoelectric effect. Summarize as saying that when a photon strikes a metal it will cause electron flow. Wilhelm Hallwachs made the first photocells. An alloy of metals made the first photoresistors. Then solar cells. Albert did not "invent" the effect, it was already known, but he EXPLAINED how it works.
It does not explain the photoelectric effect. According to the wave theory, given light of sufficient intensity, electrons should be emitted from the surface of a metal. What is observed though, is that given light of sufficient frequency, electrons will be emitted from the metal surface independent of intensity. If the frequency is too low, electrons will NOT be emitted even if the highest intensity of light was used. Albert Einstein suggested that it would be possible to explain the photoelectric effect if light was considered to be made up of particles instead of waves. The energy of the particles of light, called photons, would be proportional to the frequency of the light. Electrons would be emitted from the metal only if the energy of ONE photon was sufficient for the electron on the metal surface to break bonds and escape from the surface. Otherwise, the photons will rebound on the metal surface with no emission of electrons. Einstein 'mathematised' the photoelectric effect in the following equation: hf = Ekmax + o where h is the planck constant f is the frequency of the radiation Ekmax is the maximum kinetic energy of the emitted electrons o is the work-function energy, that is the minimum energy required for the electron to escape from the metal surface. Note: hf is the energy of a photon. It was for the explanation of the photoelectric effect that Einstein was awarded the Nobel prize in Physics in 1921. (and not for his still greater discoveries in relation to relativity)
Predictions of the wave model: Energy of light was dependent on the amplitude of the light wave, which was manifested as the brightness of the light. Higher amplitude (brighter) light would cause the ejected electrons to be more energetic. Colour of light was dependent on the frequency of the light but frequency had no bearing on the energy of the ejected photons. Predictions of the photon model: Both the energy of light and the colour of light was dependent on the frequency of the photons. Higher frequency would cause the the ejected electrons to be more energetic. The number of photons was manifested as the brightness of the light. Higher number of photons (brighter) light would cause the ejected electrons to be more numerous (higher current). Observations from the photoelectric effect experiment: Ejected electron energy was directly related to the frequency of the light and brighter light resulted in higher current. These observations were explained by the photon model and could not be explained with the wave model.
supports photon particle model as E=hf is supplied in discrete corpuscular quanta; increasing Intensity below fo gives no photoemission (not cumulative as suggested by wave theory- theoretically there will only be delay until photoemmission)
supports photon particle model as E=hf is supplied in discrete corpuscular quanta; increasing Intensity below fo gives no photoemission (not cumulative as suggested by wave theory- theoretically there will only be delay until photoemmission)
The particle model explains compton scattering and the photo-electric effect perfectly, which the wave model utterly fails to do. The full spectrum of blackbody radiation can be easily derived with the particle model of light, but not with the wave model.
Photo electric emisson or photo electric effect
The Big Bang Model!
The Rutherford model, or the nuclear model