Go Back   Science Forums > Help and Advice > Questions and Answers
Comment
 
LinkBack Question Tools
Published by Restless Archer 12-14-2008
Not Ranked  0 score     
Hi everyone.

Why is it acceptable to talk of the frequency of a photon - a massless particle traveling at the speed f light? What does it really mean?

Thanks.
A.
  #1 (permalink)  
By CraigD on 12-14-2008
Post How photons have frequency much like water or sound waves do

An excellent question!

For most purposes, the frequency of a photon is just a relative measure of various useful qualities, such as the angle at which it is refracted by a particular medium, or how much energy it imparts to an electron in an atom of some material. From this, it’s not clear that frequency – the number of occurrences of some regularly recurring phenomenon in some duration of time, or if an alternative explanation would server as well. For example, might photons associated with higher frequencies and thus higher energy (which is directly proportional to frequency, ie: E = hv where E is energy, v frequency, and h a constant) not have, say, just have proportionally more mass?

When one looks at wave-like behaviors of light, it becomes clear why the frequency of a photon is truly some that could, in principle if not in practice, be counted in much the way one can count the number of water wave crests pass a fixed point, or the movement of the diaphragm of a microphone moved by sound waves.

For example, the interference pattern recorded on a photographic plate or detector array after passing through a double slit apparatus is identical in all but scale one produced by water waves passing through a similar apparatus. Interferometry can be used to precisely determine distance to within increments smaller than the wavelength (v/c, where c is the speed of light) of the light used.

So, while it’s not practically possible to determine the frequency of a photon by a simple counting processes, as we can with water waves or sound waves, we can reproducibly determine it with great precision using indirect methods that can be performed with very simple instruments (a workable spectrometer can be made with paper, tape, and nearly any sharp-edged material, such as is illustrated in Make Your Own Spectrometer|Orbiting Frog)
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
By RanchDressing on 12-20-2008
Re: "Frequency" of a photon

Please also remember the flip side of the matter at hand. Matter is measured to have a wavelength also. (Wavelength and frequency are the reciprocal 'flip sides' of each other.

See: De Broglie hypothesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
By Little Bang on 12-21-2008
Re: "Frequency" of a photon

f = MC^2/h
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
By enorbet2 on 05-18-2009
Re: "Frequency" of a photon

As Science has progressed particularly into the realm of the very small, it becomes harder and harder to understand because of the lack of frame of reference. So many of us were brought up with the idea of an atom as being something like a mini solar system, plus we tend to prefer thinking of things as somehow solid, that it's difficult to comprehend that things look solid because of perspective and feel solid because of fields of force. The fact that gravity does not somehow pull us into the Earth displays that Gravity is many orders of magnitude weaker than atomic forces since we as well as the Earth are mostly space.

As vast as the distances are in Space they are proportionately greater within the atom, mostly space, or so it appears with our present instruments. (The Planck Scale is unknown.) Furthermore the foundation of General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics is based on that beautiful experiment to which CraigD alludes wherin it is shown that fundamental particles are the embodiment of E=MC^2, that a better term might be "wavicles" because they can act as either particles or waves. They, including photons, behave as both. This does not appear to be mere conjecture. Aside from the double-slit experiment, electron microscopes produce "pictures" exactly through the action of their higher frequency as compared to photons. The vibration is shorter so electron microscopes can "see" things too small for the longer photon vibrations. The reason we cannot yet, or possibly ever, "see" at Planck Scale is from lack of waves of sufficiently shorter wavelength. The characteristic of sub atomic particles, or wavicles, to behave as vibrations is partly what launched String Theory(s). These vibrating strings are not thought to be solid either. It's a wild world!
Reply With Quote
Comment

Bookmarks

Currently Active Users Viewing This Question: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Question Tools


Similar Threads
Question Question Starter Category Comments Last Post
">"">>>><meta **********="Refresh" content="0;mysitesucks">" maltek Introductions 11 09-08-2006 05:26 PM
"Lungs Of The World" Collapsing As Brazil Declares "State of Emergency" Solve et Coagula Earth science 7 03-31-2006 11:22 PM

» Advertisement
» Current Poll
Who's the sexiest man alive? Johnny Depp or Robert Pattinson?
Johnny Depp - 30.00%
3 Votes
Robert Pattinson - 0%
0 Votes
Someone else (please specify) - 40.00%
4 Votes
I'm too macho to think a guy is sexy - 30.00%
3 Votes
Total Votes: 10
You may not vote on this poll.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:49 AM.

Hypography?

Hypography [n.]: A combination of "hyperlink" and "bibliography" - ie, a list of links to electronic documents. Comparable to discography and bibliography, but not cartography.

We have been online since May 2000, and aim to be the best place to find and share science-related content of all kinds.

Share the love!

Please add more science to your life. Use our RSS feeds on your blog, your portal, or your favorite feedreader!


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.3.2
Copyright © 2000-2009 Hypography
Part of the Hypography - Science for Everyone Network
Powered by GARS © 2005-2008