[SPAM] Re: [Vo]:Particle size of photon
In reply to David Roberson's message of Sun, 14 Apr 2013 18:37:33 -0400 (EDT): Hi, [snip] >I have always been suspicious of why a photon of light interacts with only one electron when the wavelength of the light is many times larger than the atom that contains that electron in orbit. Why is there little response from the nearby atoms that have resonances at the same frequency? >>The difference in angular momentum for an electron for allowed transitions is always h_bar, and a photon only has 1 h_bar to give, so only 1 electron can absorb it. (I'm just dying for someone to contradict me here! :)<< Robin, don't die on us. We need your inputs. Does this logic apply to the case where a photon of light causes an electron to jump several energy levels? I know that an electron that occupies an orbital at several levels above ground state can return to either of the available levels so the reverse should be possible. In this case, there should be sufficient momentum to cause several lower level electrons to jump by the input of one photon. How is the energy allocated when this occurs? > > >One might be able to raise an argument concerning reciprocal behavior to explain why only one atom responds to the incoming photon. In this case, only a single photon is released by the change in orbital of a single electron. Why the enormous size question arises is beyond my understanding. >>I don't see the size as a problem, do you? A large wave packet that is 500 nanometers or so in size would strike an area that is many times larger than a single atom. It is difficult to understand how the energy which is spread out so greatly can be concentrated into essentially a single point. ... Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html The behavior between photons and electrons appears much like an entangled pair. That is about the only way that I can imagine that a photon that is far larger in size could only influence a single electron. Dave
Re: [Vo]:Particle size of photon
In reply to David Roberson's message of Sun, 14 Apr 2013 18:37:33 -0400 (EDT): Hi, [snip] >I have always been suspicious of why a photon of light interacts with only one >electron when the wavelength of the light is many times larger than the atom >that contains that electron in orbit. Why is there little response from the >nearby atoms that have resonances at the same frequency? The difference in angular momentum for an electron for allowed transitions is always h_bar, and a photon only has 1 h_bar to give, so only 1 electron can absorb it. (I'm just dying for someone to contradict me here! :) > > >One might be able to raise an argument concerning reciprocal behavior to >explain why only one atom responds to the incoming photon. In this case, only >a single photon is released by the change in orbital of a single electron. >Why the enormous size question arises is beyond my understanding. I don't see the size as a problem, do you? > > >A low frequency waveform such at the ones we are discussing can be polarized >in any dimension right angled to the forward travel path and is not typically >helical when man made. You can generally find a null direction to either the >electric field or magnetic field of the traveling wave. The antennae that we make are typically either vertical or horizontal, and as such generate either vertically or horizontally polarized waves. You can view a polarized wave as a slinky that has been squashed flat. IOW the axis of the coils of the helix is perpendicular to the direction of travel, whereas for a circularly polarized beam, it lies along the direction of travel. (Slinky not squashed.) (Once again, I would love to be shown to be wrong here. I would learn something new. :) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Particle size of photon
That is a big particle. Perhaps we should keep in mind that the particles that find their way through slit experiments are not like billiard balls, but behave more like a wave packet. I still am wondering how to interpret the behavior of such a packet once it hits the "screen" following the slits. Does it spread out its effective impact region in proportion to the wavelength? In other terms, can it be detected over an area that is similar in size to a short antenna at that frequency? If this is the case, then its smaller brothers should behave in like manner. I have always been suspicious of why a photon of light interacts with only one electron when the wavelength of the light is many times larger than the atom that contains that electron in orbit. Why is there little response from the nearby atoms that have resonances at the same frequency? One might be able to raise an argument concerning reciprocal behavior to explain why only one atom responds to the incoming photon. In this case, only a single photon is released by the change in orbital of a single electron. Why the enormous size question arises is beyond my understanding. A low frequency waveform such at the ones we are discussing can be polarized in any dimension right angled to the forward travel path and is not typically helical when man made. You can generally find a null direction to either the electric field or magnetic field of the traveling wave. Dave -Original Message- From: mixent To: vortex-l Sent: Sun, Apr 14, 2013 5:50 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Particle size of photon In reply to David Roberson's message of Sun, 14 Apr 2013 01:39:29 -0400 (EDT): Hi, [snip] >OK Robin, > > >The frequency of a 1 kilometer wavelength radiated signal would be as follows: (f = c / wavelength). or in this case f = 300 million meters per second / 1000 meters or 300 kilohertz. This is a legitimate frequency that can be radiated with the proper antenna. So how big is the particle equivalent for this wavelength? It appears that the concept of particles at this frequency is non sense. A packet of waves that is contained within several wavelengths make much more sense. The radius of the "particle" is the wavelength / 2 Pi, i.e. 159 m. What I think you really have is a helical wave with a radius of 159 m. > > >Dave > > > >-Original Message- >From: mixent >To: vortex-l >Sent: Sat, Apr 13, 2013 11:38 pm >Subject: Re: [Vo]:Particle size of photon > > >In reply to David Roberson's message of Sat, 13 Apr 2013 22:43:11 -0400 (EDT): >Hi, >[snip] > >Calculate the frequency. > >>A short exploration of the wave-particle behavior of photons was undertaken and >questions have come up that I would like answered. >> >> >>As we are all aware, an electromagnetic wave can be quite large in size. Since >there is no lower limit to the frequency of such a wave, it is easy to visualize >one that is greater than a kilometer between maximum electric or magnetic peaks. >A packet of waves that constitute a photon at a low frequency would likely >consist of many peaks. >> >> >>There is reason to assume that a low frequency photon would behave the same way >as its brother light photons and generate interference patterns when the size of >the experimental slits are in proportion to its wavelength. So, if the slits >are several kilometers apart, how large would the equivalent photon particle be? >The obvious answer is that it would be in the same size range as the >wavelength >of the packet. If this is true, then one might question the entire concept of a >photon as being any form of particle. After all, aren't most particles >virtually point sources as compared to normal dimensions? >> >> >>What is the currently accepted size of a photon that behaves as a particle? If >one of these passes through our very large slit experiment how would it be >detected at one location as with light photons? Could it be detected over a >large area of the impact region with say a dipole antenna? Has anyone given >this concept much thought? >> >> >>There are several other questions that can be entertained, but these should >bring on some interesting discussions. Please add your insight to this issue. >> >> >>Dave >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk > >http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html > > > Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Particle size of photon
In reply to David Roberson's message of Sun, 14 Apr 2013 01:39:29 -0400 (EDT): Hi, [snip] >OK Robin, > > >The frequency of a 1 kilometer wavelength radiated signal would be as follows: >(f = c / wavelength). or in this case f = 300 million meters per second / >1000 meters or 300 kilohertz. This is a legitimate frequency that can be >radiated with the proper antenna. So how big is the particle equivalent for >this wavelength? It appears that the concept of particles at this frequency >is non sense. A packet of waves that is contained within several wavelengths >make much more sense. The radius of the "particle" is the wavelength / 2 Pi, i.e. 159 m. What I think you really have is a helical wave with a radius of 159 m. > > >Dave > > > >-Original Message- >From: mixent >To: vortex-l >Sent: Sat, Apr 13, 2013 11:38 pm >Subject: Re: [Vo]:Particle size of photon > > >In reply to David Roberson's message of Sat, 13 Apr 2013 22:43:11 -0400 (EDT): >Hi, >[snip] > >Calculate the frequency. > >>A short exploration of the wave-particle behavior of photons was undertaken >>and >questions have come up that I would like answered. >> >> >>As we are all aware, an electromagnetic wave can be quite large in size. >>Since >there is no lower limit to the frequency of such a wave, it is easy to >visualize >one that is greater than a kilometer between maximum electric or magnetic >peaks. >A packet of waves that constitute a photon at a low frequency would likely >consist of many peaks. >> >> >>There is reason to assume that a low frequency photon would behave the same >>way >as its brother light photons and generate interference patterns when the size >of >the experimental slits are in proportion to its wavelength. So, if the slits >are several kilometers apart, how large would the equivalent photon particle >be? >The obvious answer is that it would be in the same size range as the >wavelength >of the packet. If this is true, then one might question the entire concept of >a >photon as being any form of particle. After all, aren't most particles >virtually point sources as compared to normal dimensions? >> >> >>What is the currently accepted size of a photon that behaves as a particle? >>If >one of these passes through our very large slit experiment how would it be >detected at one location as with light photons? Could it be detected over a >large area of the impact region with say a dipole antenna? Has anyone given >this concept much thought? >> >> >>There are several other questions that can be entertained, but these should >bring on some interesting discussions. Please add your insight to this issue. >> >> >>Dave >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk > >http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html > > > Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
RE: [Vo]:Particle size of photon
From: David Roberson I have been attempting to understand if or why there is a difference in the behavior of high frequency photons as compared to those that we can easily measure. ' There is, but it is not easy to follow. It involves going from inverse 4th to 5th powers. Here is a long version of Planck's derivation, since the other link I had is dead. In short, we are comparing photon power (spectral radiance) to temperature (or wavelength) http://bado-shanai.net/map%20of%20physics/mopPlancksderivBRL.htm Planck's law describes radiation emitted by a blackbody and can be written as an inverse 5th Law. Wien's power law also implies that emissive power is proportional to temperature to the 5th power. But Stefan-Boltzmann says emissive power is proportional to temperature to the 4th power. How can all of these be true? The usual explanation given is that Stefan-Boltzmann applies to the total emissive power (the integration of the emissive power density, or the area under the curve) while Wien's power law applies to the peak. When we look at these laws in action for stars of different surface temperature, there is a strong narrowing of the spectrum with increasing temperatures such that the peak is spiked and the distribution is compressed. Wien explains the shift of the peak to shorter wavelengths, while the Stefan-Boltzmann explains the abrupt growth in the height of the curve, but eventually the two become problematic. IOW - going from a 4th to a 5th power may not be accounted for in terms of expectation. One way to verbalize this is in trying to explain the oddities of GRBs, where radiation seems to be more powerful than it should be (penetration depth) it can be said that these rays act as if they are exponentially greater in power. And there is some truth to that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma-ray_burst
Re: [Vo]:Particle size of photon
Eric, What if you decided to chase after one of the gamma rays? If you constructed a spaceship that traveled at just below the speed of light relative to the source of the ray, it would be effectively Doppler shifted indefinitely. What would you measure at that point? I would suspect like you that the shifted ray would behave exactly as a low frequency signal that is locally generated within your ship. It would be interesting to see the diffraction patterns and other interference patterns under these conditions. I find it interesting to consider the consequences of the spacing of slits for a two slit experiment in such an environment. The slits are along a line that is perpendicular to the direction of motion of the ray. I recall that there is not supposed to be any translation to dimensions at right angles to the relative forward motion. If this is true, there may be experimental problems arising as a result of slit spacing. In the original reference frame there would be a nice interference pattern with the light and dark bars. There would not be a significant pattern detected on the relatively high velocity ship since the spacing between slits would be much less than a wavelength of the transformed gammas. For a real life test, gammas would not be a good choice as a source since it would be nearly impossible to build a two slit experiment of the needed size. Instead, lets use light emitted by an atom in the thought experiment. Dave -Original Message- From: Eric Walker To: vortex-l Sent: Sun, Apr 14, 2013 1:25 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Particle size of photon I wrote: to an observer much smaller and more quickly moving than the gamma ray photon, the gamma photon will behave in the manner of the radio wave photon in our frame of reference. By "more quickly moving," I'm thinking not of velocity, but of time slices -- the small little thing gets a lot more done in a given period of time than the gamma photon. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Particle size of photon
I have been attempting to understand if or why there is a difference in the behavior of high frequency photons as compared to those that we can easily measure. One problem that crops up frequently is that the energy of these waveforms travels outwards at the speed of light relative to us the observer. We are limited to being able to detect the time changing fields with instruments at a location removed from the source to determine the frequency of the signal. According to special relativity, we are unable to catch up with a moving wave and freeze it in position to actually measure the distance between field peaks. No matter how fast we move, the wave will always escape from us at the speed of light. This is true even if we are traveling in a direction that is backwards relative to the forward directed wave front. We do know that the Doppler effect will cause the frequency that we measure to vary with our relative motion compared to the source of the radiation. And, since any time we measure the speed of light in our frame of reference it reads the same, the wavelength must be modified along with the apparent frequency. It becomes tricky when the original source and us calculate different length measurements between field peaks depending upon our relative motion. Perhaps the measurement concept is not valid. Is it possible that we can not effectively freeze time and then move along the now static electric and magnetic field patterns to determine the distance between peaks? Considering that we can not ever actually catch up with the expanding fields in any know manner, then this might be a limitation that is placed upon us by relativity. The best that we can do is to measure the time changing fields that are passing through our reference frame. Then we can determine the frequency of the wave by our local clock and it is accurate as far as we can prove. I can see that there are a lot of interesting implications that arise in the pursuit of these concepts. Dave -Original Message- From: Eric Walker To: vortex-l Sent: Sun, Apr 14, 2013 12:47 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Particle size of photon On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 7:43 PM, David Roberson wrote: What is the currently accepted size of a photon that behaves as a particle? If one of these passes through our very large slit experiment how would it be detected at one location as with light photons? Could it be detected over a large area of the impact region with say a dipole antenna? Has anyone given this concept much thought? I was thinking about this myself. If you contrast a photon involved in the transmission of a radio wave with one that is in the gamma ray range, there is an obvious qualitative difference from our frame of reference. The gamma photon is like a tiny bullet, and the radio wave photon is like a large, and enlarging, bubble. Despite the clear qualitative difference, I am led to believe this difference is entirely relative to the physical and temporal dimensions of the frame of reference. To an observer far larger and more slow moving than the radio wave photon, I suspect that photon will interact with its surroundings like the gamma ray photon does in our world, and to an observer much smaller and more quickly moving than the gamma ray photon, the gamma photon will behave in the manner of the radio wave photon in our frame of reference. If we take away this kind of relativity of the temporal and physical frame of reference for photons, this would appear to imply a kind of absolute position in the midst of a spacetime otherwise characterized by special relativity. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Particle size of photon
OK Robin, The frequency of a 1 kilometer wavelength radiated signal would be as follows: (f = c / wavelength). or in this case f = 300 million meters per second / 1000 meters or 300 kilohertz. This is a legitimate frequency that can be radiated with the proper antenna. So how big is the particle equivalent for this wavelength? It appears that the concept of particles at this frequency is non sense. A packet of waves that is contained within several wavelengths make much more sense. Dave -Original Message- From: mixent To: vortex-l Sent: Sat, Apr 13, 2013 11:38 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Particle size of photon In reply to David Roberson's message of Sat, 13 Apr 2013 22:43:11 -0400 (EDT): Hi, [snip] Calculate the frequency. >A short exploration of the wave-particle behavior of photons was undertaken >and questions have come up that I would like answered. > > >As we are all aware, an electromagnetic wave can be quite large in size. >Since there is no lower limit to the frequency of such a wave, it is easy to visualize one that is greater than a kilometer between maximum electric or magnetic peaks. A packet of waves that constitute a photon at a low frequency would likely consist of many peaks. > > >There is reason to assume that a low frequency photon would behave the same >way as its brother light photons and generate interference patterns when the size of the experimental slits are in proportion to its wavelength. So, if the slits are several kilometers apart, how large would the equivalent photon particle be? The obvious answer is that it would be in the same size range as the wavelength of the packet. If this is true, then one might question the entire concept of a photon as being any form of particle. After all, aren't most particles virtually point sources as compared to normal dimensions? > > >What is the currently accepted size of a photon that behaves as a particle? >If one of these passes through our very large slit experiment how would it be detected at one location as with light photons? Could it be detected over a large area of the impact region with say a dipole antenna? Has anyone given this concept much thought? > > >There are several other questions that can be entertained, but these should bring on some interesting discussions. Please add your insight to this issue. > > >Dave Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Particle size of photon
I wrote: to an observer much smaller and more quickly moving than the gamma ray > photon, the gamma photon will behave in the manner of the radio wave photon > in our frame of reference. > By "more quickly moving," I'm thinking not of velocity, but of time slices -- the small little thing gets a lot more done in a given period of time than the gamma photon. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Particle size of photon
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 7:43 PM, David Roberson wrote: What is the currently accepted size of a photon that behaves as a particle? > If one of these passes through our very large slit experiment how would it > be detected at one location as with light photons? Could it be detected > over a large area of the impact region with say a dipole antenna? Has > anyone given this concept much thought? > I was thinking about this myself. If you contrast a photon involved in the transmission of a radio wave with one that is in the gamma ray range, there is an obvious qualitative difference from our frame of reference. The gamma photon is like a tiny bullet, and the radio wave photon is like a large, and enlarging, bubble. Despite the clear qualitative difference, I am led to believe this difference is entirely relative to the physical and temporal dimensions of the frame of reference. To an observer far larger and more slow moving than the radio wave photon, I suspect that photon will interact with its surroundings like the gamma ray photon does in our world, and to an observer much smaller and more quickly moving than the gamma ray photon, the gamma photon will behave in the manner of the radio wave photon in our frame of reference. If we take away this kind of relativity of the temporal and physical frame of reference for photons, this would appear to imply a kind of absolute position in the midst of a spacetime otherwise characterized by special relativity. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Particle size of photon
In reply to David Roberson's message of Sat, 13 Apr 2013 22:43:11 -0400 (EDT): Hi, [snip] Calculate the frequency. >A short exploration of the wave-particle behavior of photons was undertaken >and questions have come up that I would like answered. > > >As we are all aware, an electromagnetic wave can be quite large in size. >Since there is no lower limit to the frequency of such a wave, it is easy to >visualize one that is greater than a kilometer between maximum electric or >magnetic peaks. A packet of waves that constitute a photon at a low frequency >would likely consist of many peaks. > > >There is reason to assume that a low frequency photon would behave the same >way as its brother light photons and generate interference patterns when the >size of the experimental slits are in proportion to its wavelength. So, if >the slits are several kilometers apart, how large would the equivalent photon >particle be? The obvious answer is that it would be in the same size range >as the wavelength of the packet. If this is true, then one might question the >entire concept of a photon as being any form of particle. After all, aren't >most particles virtually point sources as compared to normal dimensions? > > >What is the currently accepted size of a photon that behaves as a particle? >If one of these passes through our very large slit experiment how would it be >detected at one location as with light photons? Could it be detected over a >large area of the impact region with say a dipole antenna? Has anyone given >this concept much thought? > > >There are several other questions that can be entertained, but these should >bring on some interesting discussions. Please add your insight to this issue. > > >Dave Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
[Vo]:Particle size of photon
A short exploration of the wave-particle behavior of photons was undertaken and questions have come up that I would like answered. As we are all aware, an electromagnetic wave can be quite large in size. Since there is no lower limit to the frequency of such a wave, it is easy to visualize one that is greater than a kilometer between maximum electric or magnetic peaks. A packet of waves that constitute a photon at a low frequency would likely consist of many peaks. There is reason to assume that a low frequency photon would behave the same way as its brother light photons and generate interference patterns when the size of the experimental slits are in proportion to its wavelength. So, if the slits are several kilometers apart, how large would the equivalent photon particle be? The obvious answer is that it would be in the same size range as the wavelength of the packet. If this is true, then one might question the entire concept of a photon as being any form of particle. After all, aren't most particles virtually point sources as compared to normal dimensions? What is the currently accepted size of a photon that behaves as a particle? If one of these passes through our very large slit experiment how would it be detected at one location as with light photons? Could it be detected over a large area of the impact region with say a dipole antenna? Has anyone given this concept much thought? There are several other questions that can be entertained, but these should bring on some interesting discussions. Please add your insight to this issue. Dave
