photons and reflection
in [Basics]
|
Prev: Question about common-collector circuits.
Next: Absolutly Free Lectures on C++ by MIT Studied Professor
From: BURT on 4 Dec 2009 19:49 On Dec 4, 1:58 pm, George Herold <ggher...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 2, 5:19 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Dec 2, 2:09 pm, George Herold <ggher...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Dec 2, 4:43 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 2, 1:04 pm, George Herold <ggher...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Dec 2, 3:16 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Dec 2, 3:43 am, p.kins...(a)ic.ac.uk wrote: > > > > > > > > BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > What wave is the particle of light in? the electric opr > > > > > > > > magnetic wave? > > > > > > > > Here's how the theory can be described (simplified, obviously): > > > > > > > > (a) solve Maxwell's equations for a suitable system, and get a set > > > > > > > of normalizable basis functions allowing you to describe any field > > > > > > > configuration. > > > > > > > > (b) these basis functions usually have both electric and magnetic > > > > > > > field contributions; they are usually called "mode functions", and > > > > > > > tend to oscillate in space and time (although not all will). > > > > > > > > (c) quantize the field inside each mode; this gives you a countable > > > > > > > series of possible mode excitations. > > > > > > > > (d) to describe some chosen field configuration, you combine a > > > > > > > suitable set of modes containing appropriate quantum excitations. > > > > > > > You may need to account for non-trivial correlations between the > > > > > > > modes, and between the quantum states in the same and different > > > > > > > modes. > > > > > > > > There is no "particle of light". Instead there are countable > > > > > > > excitations of the wave-like field modes. These modes usually > > > > > > > combine both electric and magnetic contributions. > > > > > > > > It's not a particle, it's a wave. But you _can_ count the > > > > > > > excitations. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > ---------------------------------+--------------------------------- > > > > > > > Dr. Paul Kinsler > > > > > > > Blackett Laboratory (Photonics) (ph) +44-20-759-47734 (fax) 47714 > > > > > > > Imperial College London, Dr.Paul.Kins...(a)physics.org > > > > > > > SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom. http://www.qols.ph.ic.ac.uk/~kinsle/ > > > > > > > There are only a very few quantizations in light energy quantities of > > > > > > the atom. Certainly not enough for white light we see. This does not > > > > > > correspond to the reality of the full spectrum produced by the white > > > > > > light. A light bulb passed through a prism produces a full spectrum of > > > > > > energy levels but does not have enough quantized states in its atom to > > > > > > do so. > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > Mitch, The light bulb can be thought of as a black body radiator. It > > > > > doesn't matter what kind of atoms the black body is made of. All that > > > > > is important is the temperature.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackbody_radiation > > > > > > George H.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > George my point is that energy transitions cannot be quantized in the > > > > case of a white light. You might have a light filliment composed of a > > > > few different atoms but these could not produce the full spectrum of > > > > all the light energies noticed when its light is passed through a > > > > prism. > > > > > Evidently only sometimes is light energy quantized. > > > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > Ahh, there are two types of quantization here. For an atom you have > > > quantized electron states. The photon emmited when the atom goes from > > > one state to the other has a particular 'quantized' frequency. But > > > this is just because of the uderlying quantized electron states. > > > There is then the quantization of the EM field that is called a > > > photon....(And I'll never call it a particle again.) When you measure > > > light you either see one photon or none....never some fraction of a > > > photon. (OK, most times you see lots of photons, but always an > > > interger number.) > > > > George H. > > > > (I was afraid you were going to ask, "From where comes the photon > > > emmited by a black body?" I don't have a good picture of that > > > process.)- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > The electron state is simply which of the 4 shells it is in. There are > > only 4 fundamental sizes to the atom because of these round shells > > that science calles energy levels of the electron. > > > White light from a surface composed of a few different atoms is > > evidence that emmision is not always quantized. > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Hmmm, Mitch if you are really interested in this stuff you'll have to > take a class (well there are QM classes in video on the web.) and work > through the standard problems. There are an infite number of energy > states of an atom. At the larger quantum numbers the states have > almost the same energy and we then just call them 'the continum' (or > some such term.) I have no idea where the 4 number came from but it's > wrong. > > George H.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - I don't read and I don't go to school but light still comes from every angle in reflection. Mitch Raemsch
From: BURT on 4 Dec 2009 22:22 On Dec 4, 4:49 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Dec 4, 1:58 pm, George Herold <ggher...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Dec 2, 5:19 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Dec 2, 2:09 pm, George Herold <ggher...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 2, 4:43 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Dec 2, 1:04 pm, George Herold <ggher...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Dec 2, 3:16 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Dec 2, 3:43 am, p.kins...(a)ic.ac.uk wrote: > > > > > > > > > BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > What wave is the particle of light in? the electric opr > > > > > > > > > magnetic wave? > > > > > > > > > Here's how the theory can be described (simplified, obviously): > > > > > > > > > (a) solve Maxwell's equations for a suitable system, and get a set > > > > > > > > of normalizable basis functions allowing you to describe any field > > > > > > > > configuration. > > > > > > > > > (b) these basis functions usually have both electric and magnetic > > > > > > > > field contributions; they are usually called "mode functions", and > > > > > > > > tend to oscillate in space and time (although not all will).. > > > > > > > > > (c) quantize the field inside each mode; this gives you a countable > > > > > > > > series of possible mode excitations. > > > > > > > > > (d) to describe some chosen field configuration, you combine a > > > > > > > > suitable set of modes containing appropriate quantum excitations. > > > > > > > > You may need to account for non-trivial correlations between the > > > > > > > > modes, and between the quantum states in the same and different > > > > > > > > modes. > > > > > > > > > There is no "particle of light". Instead there are countable > > > > > > > > excitations of the wave-like field modes. These modes usually > > > > > > > > combine both electric and magnetic contributions. > > > > > > > > > It's not a particle, it's a wave. But you _can_ count the > > > > > > > > excitations. > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------+--------------------------------- > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul Kinsler > > > > > > > > Blackett Laboratory (Photonics) (ph) +44-20-759-47734 (fax) 47714 > > > > > > > > Imperial College London, Dr.Paul.Kins...(a)physics.org > > > > > > > > SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom. http://www.qols..ph.ic.ac.uk/~kinsle/ > > > > > > > > There are only a very few quantizations in light energy quantities of > > > > > > > the atom. Certainly not enough for white light we see. This does not > > > > > > > correspond to the reality of the full spectrum produced by the white > > > > > > > light. A light bulb passed through a prism produces a full spectrum of > > > > > > > energy levels but does not have enough quantized states in its atom to > > > > > > > do so. > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > Mitch, The light bulb can be thought of as a black body radiator. It > > > > > > doesn't matter what kind of atoms the black body is made of. All that > > > > > > is important is the temperature.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackbody_radiation > > > > > > > George H.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > George my point is that energy transitions cannot be quantized in the > > > > > case of a white light. You might have a light filliment composed of a > > > > > few different atoms but these could not produce the full spectrum of > > > > > all the light energies noticed when its light is passed through a > > > > > prism. > > > > > > Evidently only sometimes is light energy quantized. > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > Ahh, there are two types of quantization here. For an atom you have > > > > quantized electron states. The photon emmited when the atom goes from > > > > one state to the other has a particular 'quantized' frequency. But > > > > this is just because of the uderlying quantized electron states. > > > > There is then the quantization of the EM field that is called a > > > > photon....(And I'll never call it a particle again.) When you measure > > > > light you either see one photon or none....never some fraction of a > > > > photon. (OK, most times you see lots of photons, but always an > > > > interger number.) > > > > > George H. > > > > > (I was afraid you were going to ask, "From where comes the photon > > > > emmited by a black body?" I don't have a good picture of that > > > > process.)- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > The electron state is simply which of the 4 shells it is in. There are > > > only 4 fundamental sizes to the atom because of these round shells > > > that science calles energy levels of the electron. > > > > White light from a surface composed of a few different atoms is > > > evidence that emmision is not always quantized. > > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > Hmmm, Mitch if you are really interested in this stuff you'll have to > > take a class (well there are QM classes in video on the web.) and work > > through the standard problems. There are an infite number of energy > > states of an atom. At the larger quantum numbers the states have > > almost the same energy and we then just call them 'the continum' (or > > some such term.) I have no idea where the 4 number came from but it's > > wrong. > > > George H.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > I don't read and I don't go to school but light still comes from every > angle in reflection. > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - A mirror is an example of a metal coating that can handle every frequency of light. Quantization does not apply here either. A rainbow and anything exibiting white light cannot be a phenomenon of quantization of energy in the atom. A laser would be an exception that needs to be taken into account. Evidently quantization has a limited applicability. Mitch Raemsch
From: George Herold on 4 Dec 2009 23:12 BURT wrote: <big snip> > > George H.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > I don't read and I don't go to school but light still comes from every > angle in reflection. > > Mitch Raemsch "> I don't read and I don't go to school" Oh well, as Newton (?) said, I can see so far, because Im standing on the shoulders of giants. George H.
From: Louis Boyd on 4 Dec 2009 23:31 BURT wrote: > A mirror is an example of a metal coating that can handle every > frequency of light. Quantization does not apply here either. A rainbow > and anything exibiting white light cannot be a phenomenon of > quantization of energy in the atom. A laser would be an exception that > needs to be taken into account. Evidently quantization has a limited > applicability. It's my understanding that quantization applies to the detection of EM radiation when the detection involve changing electron states including modifying chemical bonds. It's my understanding that it doesn't apply when detection is accomplished simply by heating (increase in molecular velocity) not involving ionization. So QM can apply to white light and rainbows if you use your eye, film, or a CCD but not if you use a bolometer or thermometer as the detector. I could be dead wrong, but I consider photons to only "exist" when and where light exchanges energy with matter at a sub-molecular level. At least that view seems to be sufficient for engineering needs when working with emitters and detectors. Educate me. How does that view conflict with formal QM theory?
From: BURT on 4 Dec 2009 23:45
On Dec 4, 8:31 pm, Louis Boyd <b...(a)apt0.sao.arizona.edu> wrote: > BURT wrote: > > A mirror is an example of a metal coating that can handle every > > frequency of light. Quantization does not apply here either. A rainbow > > and anything exibiting white light cannot be a phenomenon of > > quantization of energy in the atom. A laser would be an exception that > > needs to be taken into account. Evidently quantization has a limited > > applicability. > > It's my understanding that quantization applies to the detection of EM > radiation when the detection involve changing electron states including > modifying chemical bonds. It's my understanding that it doesn't apply > when detection is accomplished simply by heating (increase in > molecular velocity) not involving ionization. So QM can apply to white > light and rainbows if you use your eye, film, or a CCD but not if you > use a bolometer or thermometer as the detector. > > I could be dead wrong, but I consider photons to only "exist" when and > where light exchanges energy with matter at a sub-molecular level. At > least that view seems to be sufficient for engineering needs when > working with emitters and detectors. > > Educate me. How does that view conflict with formal QM theory? Evidently some atoms can radiate and absorb all visable frequencies such as in the example of a mirror. I am not educated. Mitch Raemsch |