photons and reflection
in [Basics]
|
Prev: Question about common-collector circuits.
Next: Absolutly Free Lectures on C++ by MIT Studied Professor
From: p.kinsler on 8 Dec 2009 06:36 Androcles <Headmaster(a)hogwarts.physics_q> wrote: > Quite right, Bob. I sometimes use a "leapfrog" analogy, the electric > field creates the magnetic field as the electric collapses and then the > magnetic creates the electric field in turn. Why not consider the Yee grid for discretizing and numerically solving Maxwell's equations? That might be leapfroggy enough for you, without requiring any dubious analogies. -- ---------------------------------+--------------------------------- Dr. Paul Kinsler Blackett Laboratory (Photonics) (ph) +44-20-759-47734 (fax) 47714 Imperial College London, Dr.Paul.Kinsler(a)physics.org SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom. http://www.qols.ph.ic.ac.uk/~kinsle/
From: eric gisse on 8 Dec 2009 06:58 p.kinsler(a)ic.ac.uk wrote: > BURT <macromitch(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> The truth is meant to be known. Quantization is the lesser >> concept than full ranges of energy. > > The process of quantization doesn't require discrete, countable > sets of EM mode functions (although that may well make the > mathematics easier). Quantization doesn't necessarily restrict > the allowed energies. > You are wasting your time explaining this to him. He is nothing but a noise generator.
From: Androcles on 8 Dec 2009 09:03 <p.kinsler(a)ic.ac.uk> wrote in message news:4aq1v6-pg8.ln1(a)ph-kinsle.qols.ph.ic.ac.uk... > Androcles <Headmaster(a)hogwarts.physics_q> wrote: >> Quite right, Bob. I sometimes use a "leapfrog" analogy, the electric >> field creates the magnetic field as the electric collapses and then the >> magnetic creates the electric field in turn. > > Why not consider the Yee grid for discretizing and numerically solving > Maxwell's equations? That might be leapfroggy enough for you, without > requiring any dubious analogies. > Because the first requirement is to understand the physical concept, not play mathematical games. Maxwell plagiarised the work of Faraday, Gauss and Ampere. Maxwell's aether was a dubious analogy dispelled by Michelson, that's why.
From: George Herold on 8 Dec 2009 10:03 On Dec 7, 10:53 am, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_q> wrote: > "Bob Masta" <N0S...(a)daqarta.com> wrote in message > > news:4b1d0fb6.1129688(a)news.sysmatrix.net... > > > > > > > On Sun, 6 Dec 2009 20:31:18 -0800 (PST), BURT > > <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>If light is a particle which of its waves is this particle in? its > >>magnetic wave or electric wave? > > > Yes. Don't think of this as "either-or", think of > > the photon as the oscillation between magnetic and > > electric fields. To use a mechanical analogy, you > > might think of the photon as a rubber ball flying > > through space. It is springy in the X and Y > > dimensions, and oscillates between having its > > energy stored in X-compression/Y-elongation, > > versus Y-compression/X-elongation. > > > Now take away the ball. > > > Best regards, > > > Bob Masta > > Quite right, Bob. I sometimes use a "leapfrog" analogy, the electric > field creates the magnetic field as the electric collapses and then the > magnetic creates the electric field in turn. > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AC/AC.htm- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Hi Androcles. I use to like this analogy too. Until I learned a few years ago that in E-M radiation the E and B are in phase! At first I thought there was a mistake... but then discovered that the mistake was mine. (Your link shows correctly the in phase behavior so I realize I'm not telling you anything you don't know.) Anyway the analogy can lead to false conclusions. (At least for me.) So now I see that the E field at some time was 'created' by some B field at a previous time.... Which starts to 'weird' me out if think too hard. All of a sudden I picture 'photons' travelling in both directions. George H.
From: Androcles on 8 Dec 2009 11:16
"George Herold" <ggherold(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:0497f18c-647c-4792-a268-197905b5f01d(a)u7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... On Dec 7, 10:53 am, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_q> wrote: > "Bob Masta" <N0S...(a)daqarta.com> wrote in message > > news:4b1d0fb6.1129688(a)news.sysmatrix.net... > > > > > > > On Sun, 6 Dec 2009 20:31:18 -0800 (PST), BURT > > <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>If light is a particle which of its waves is this particle in? its > >>magnetic wave or electric wave? > > > Yes. Don't think of this as "either-or", think of > > the photon as the oscillation between magnetic and > > electric fields. To use a mechanical analogy, you > > might think of the photon as a rubber ball flying > > through space. It is springy in the X and Y > > dimensions, and oscillates between having its > > energy stored in X-compression/Y-elongation, > > versus Y-compression/X-elongation. > > > Now take away the ball. > > > Best regards, > > > Bob Masta > > Quite right, Bob. I sometimes use a "leapfrog" analogy, the electric > field creates the magnetic field as the electric collapses and then the > magnetic creates the electric field in turn. > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AC/AC.htm- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Hi Androcles. I use to like this analogy too. Until I learned a few years ago that in E-M radiation the E and B are in phase! =========================================== Then you should unlearn it immediately. If E and B were in phase both would be zero simultaneously and that violates the first law of thermodynamics, you'd create energy from nothing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_thermodynamics But anyway, Maxwell's equations never did claim E and B were in phase, what you've "learnt" is a rumour spread by the incompetent. =========================================== At first I thought there was a mistake... but then discovered that the mistake was mine. (Your link shows correctly the in phase behavior so I realize I'm not telling you anything you don't know.) Anyway the analogy can lead to false conclusions. (At least for me.) So now I see that the E field at some time was 'created' by some B field at a previous time.... ============================================ Any spark will start the process. A flame is a chemical reaction whereby the electrons of the atoms are rearranged to build a different molecule. 2H2 + O2 -> 2H2O. ============================================ Which starts to 'weird' me out if think too hard. All of a sudden I picture 'photons' travelling in both directions. George H. =========================================== Androcles' third law: For every photon there is an equal and opposite rephoton. http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/rephoton.gif (It's Newton's third law applied to E-M waves and allows for light to travel in beams -- quite simple, really.) Of course you'll never see a rephoton without a mirror, it is travelling away from you. Rephotons are the major cause of poorly understood spooky entanglement. -- 'By denying scientific principles, one may maintain any paradox.' - Galileo Galilei 'There is nothing so easy but that it becomes difficult when you do it with reluctance.'- Marcus Tullius Cicero New ideas are old ideas resurrected. - Androcles. |