Temporal Dilemma

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Raz, you are being a bonehead. This is not about math it is about Plancks Constant. DUH !!!!!!!!!

Correct, as you said h is j*s and not j/s. However when computing black body radiation the formula is E=nhv, where n is a whole number. This means that the minimum energy of a PHOTON is 1h, unless of course you can come up with a whole positive number that is less than 1.

Here is where I give you a break (sort of). A photon is not a wave, so there may be far infrared and radio WAVES that manifest in fractional units (of h). Sir, 'h' is the REAL difference between one electron orbit and an other, and not some odd-ball mathmatical fiction you seem to think it is.
 
Razmataz is correct the unit for Planck's constant is j*s not j/s. This means that 6.63x10^-34 j*s is not energy per unit of time. Had I taken the time to evaluate the units of E=hf I would have realized this sooner. I apologies for my mistake. This does not change the results of the equation. The answer is correct as is the unit. 6.63x10^-34 joules is the minimum energy for any photon.

Planck's constant

(symbol h), fundamental physical constant characteristic of the mathematical formulations of quantum mechanics, which describes the behaviour of particles and waves on the atomic scale, including the particle aspect of light. The significance of Planck's constant in this context is that radiation, such as light, is emitted, transmitted, and absorbed in discrete energy packets, or quanta, determined by the frequency of the radiation and the value of Planck's constant.

The energy E of each quantum, or each photon, equals Planck's constant h times the radiation frequency symbolized by the letter f, , or simply E = h.
Because h is the minimum energy packet that can be emitted, transmitted, and absorbed and E = h there cannot be a 1/2Hz or 1/4Hz wave since this would drop E below h and this would be contrary to quantum mechanics.

The dimension of Planck's constant is the product of energy multiplied by time, a quantity called action. Planck's constant is often defined, therefore, as the elementary quantum of action. Its value in metre-kilogram-second units is 6.6260755 10^-34 joule-second.

E=hf is a general equation that can be used to calculate the energy of a photon at any frequency.
EXAMPLE:
The red spectral line of lithium occurs at 671 nm (6.71x10^-7 m). Calculate the energy of one photon of this light.
SOLUTION:
The frequency of this light is
f = c/wavelength = (3.00x10^8 m/s) / (6.71x10^-7 m) = 4.47x10^14/s
The energy of one photon is E=hf
E = (6.63x10^-34 j*s)
mad.gif
4.47x10^14/s)= 2.96x10^-19 joules

Razmatazz: What other errors and or invalid assumptions did you find?
 
It seems to me that we are back to energy vs power again. Energy is the ability to do work, but when you must say how much TIME it takes to do that work it requires the use units of power (aka watt-hours, joule-sec, horsepower, etc.).

Here is the point I've been trying to make: Even though a high frequency photon has higher ENERGY than a low frequency photon, it delivers that energy for a porportionatly shorter peroid of time. Therefore the total amount of POWER delivered by any photon is the same; 6.63*10^-34 JouleSECONDS.

Yup, I am making this up as I go along. I don't know a damn thing about math or physics, but following your lead is a lot of fun.
 
Okay, Shadow, here's my point. Neither you nor Time~Master have produced any reason that Planck's constant actually defines a minimum energy for the photon. Time~Master comes closer in his last post, with "Because h is the minimum energy packet that can be emitted, transmitted, and absorbed...", but he takes this as a given, and not something that must be proven. It is not self-evident from E=hv or E=nhv , and if you make this claim I'd like to see the equation that it comes from. Your weak "there is no smaller positive integer than one" argument is not valid, as you have given no reason why a photon can't have a frequency less than 1 Hz. The Hz is not a fundamental unit of frequency any more than is the min^-1 or the hour^-1 .

And I can tell you still don't get the concept of the quantum - the nature of the photon IS wave-like, just as it is partially particle-like. ALL EM RADIATION IS IN THE FORM OF PHOTONS. Thus it is all wave-like.

Time~Master, you say that a photon can have no frequency lower than 1 Hz because it would drop E below h. But this is meaningless; they're in different units. It's like comparing apples and oranges. I still see no reason in the equations that E has a set lower limit. The fundamental gist of the equations is that the energy of a photon depends on both h and the frequency. Thus I see an infinitely variable system - no limits have been given on v.

(PS I use v for frequency because it looks like the Greek letter nu, which is what my physics text uses.)

Hyperbole'll get ya every time - I found no other errors, I was just being 'hyperbolic', so to speak.
 
Razmatazz

There is a big difference between visualizing something and observing it. I never said anything about observing 6 dimensions. You don't have to observe something to gain an understanding of what it might be like. Although I'm sure the reality of the situation would be slightly different than the visualization, it makes sense and until someone convinces me otherwise I'll keep it.
 
Ok Razmatazzzzzzzz, you sure do remind me of some one who last month posed under a different name but still played a signifcant role as an unofficial "stick in the mud". But then maybe I'm confusing you with your evil twin.

You have presented some valid and correct points and make a good SCIENCE COP. Problem is you think you have ALL the answers. You don't. For example you just posted "ALL ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION IS IN THE FORM OF PHOTONS". This just ain't so, and it reveals your SHALLOW understanding of the subject. Not only that but if it were so it would disprove your own argument for the the NON-quantal nature of light. You see, a wave is a wave and a photon is a photon. Your above quote is absolute nonsense.

Did you ever stop to think that some of this difficulty people have in "proving it to you" has to do with the fact that you aren't particularly bright? In your case, my friend, you should indeed stick very close to the math because you are a lost puppy without it.

As I said at the beginning of this thread "nobody understands quantum theory". But noooo you know all about it.
 
Albert Einstein recognized the value of Planck,s quantum hypothesis in connecion with the photoelectric effect. He reasoned that, since emission and absorption of light radiation occurs discontinuously, certainly the transmission field should be discontinuous. Proceeding on this hypothesis, Einstein published in 1905 a very simple and straightforward explanation of the photoelectric effect. A few years later, the very accurate experimental work of Millikan, Hughes, and Compton established the correctness of Einstein,s explanstion The extension of Planck,s quantum ideas by Einstein firmly established THE QUANTUM THEORY which assumus that the transfer of energy between light radiations and matter occurs in discrete units called PHOTON, the magnitude of which depends on the frequency of the radiation.
 
From yourdictionary.com :

Main Entry: pho.ton
Pronunciation: 'fO-"tän
Function: noun
Etymology: phot- + <^2>-on
Date: 1916
<...>
2 : a quantum of electromagnetic radiation

Shadow, you don't know what you're talking about. I could write a huge, angry reply, and continue the flamewar you're obviously trying to start, but I won't. Suffice it to say that I won't try to reason with a person who disregards any information contrary to eir viewpoint.

Time~Master, I agree, but this still gives no reason to assume that the minimum wavelength of light is 1 Hz. Do you have something that supports this?
 
Razmatazz:

Do you not mean, minimum frequency of an EM wave is 1 Hz. Since frequency is inversely proportional to the wavelength, we are also talking about a max wavelength.
 
I've been really bad with the mental hiccups on this thread. Goes to show that physics ain't my main focus. Yes, I meant minimum frequency of 1 Hz . What leads you to believe that this is the minimum frequency?
 
At various points up the the EM spectrum the waves change in form. Heck waves at certain times and energy levels can even turn into photons. BUT this one Hertz 'barrier' is a mathmatical fiction that comes out of not fully understanding certain aspects of the physical reality described by the math.
 
The power of an EM wave does not drop with frequency, the RATE of delivery does. The wave will continue for how ever long it takes to expend its one quantum (h) of energy.

Waves at extremely low frequency ([1000Hz) the electrical effects being negligable, are not true EM waves anyway. So who knows if the rules for high frequency photons still apply to them.
 
Shadow, I don't know why I'm even writing this, but...

All photons are EM radiation, and vice versa. That's just a fact of life - they're circularly defined, they're one and the same thing. That's quantum mechanics for ya.

you said:"this one Hertz 'barrier' is a mathmatical fiction that comes out of not fully understanding certain aspects of the physical reality described by the math."

Exactly my point! You don't understand the math, so you created this fiction of a barrier which never existed in the first place. It never made sense from the very beginning.

And, you still don't get the idea of units yet. Power already is energy delivered over time. Each photon/wave does not deliver an absolute amount of energy but rather an amount which varies with its frequency. And your last comment makes no sense. If the electric effects were negligible, the photon would be negligible too. They're one and the same thing.
 
Razmatazz:
Light is emitted, transmitted, and absorbed in discrete energy packets, or quanta, determined by the frequency of the radiation and the value of Planck's constant. This I belive we agree on.
This gives us the equation E=hf which is the energy of one photon. The terms of the equation are hf, h we are clear on so that leaves frequency(f). So the question I ask what does it mean to have a frequency of 1Hz?
 
OK, nice to see a step-by-step attack.

A frequency of 1 Hz means that the phase of the EM wave (either the E or the M part) cycles through 2Pi radians in 1 second.

Why should this, as you suggest, be significant?
 
The problen is that the math makes it appear as though a 1/2 Hertz photon consists of 1/2 a quantum of energy BUT by definition there IS NO SUCH THING AS A PARTIAL (half or any fraction) QUANTUM. Go figure.
 
No, it _would_ be a wave that took 2s to oscillate. and its energy would be 3.31*10^-34 J . Simple as that.

Where's the evidence that this is less than some critical energy?
 
Back
Top