![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Jim" wrote in message ... Holy crap, I knew somebody would know, but now I've got a splitting headache. I wonder what happens to all the particles of light that can't make it through windows. Do they pile up on the window sill? Never mind, my brain hurts ![]() Particles of light that do not make it through the window and which are not reflected by the surface are absorbed into the structure. The excess energy is then radiated away as heat. The difference between a particle and a wave is the difference between ripples on the water and the stone you threw in there. The particle is the object itself. Waves are the measurable effect of the passage of the particle. It is a fundamental axiom of physics that for very small particles you can measure either the wave or the particle, but not both simultaneously. Hence you can look at light as either a wave and measure its characteristics in that manner, or you can look at where a particular photon is and measure its characteristics at that moment. The reason is there is nothing small enough to see both. How would you 'see' a photon, no matter how much you magnified it? All you can see is where it went. The light bulb does not create photons. It emits photons that are already stored in the bulb. It probably absorbs enough electrons in the process so that its weight does not change significantly. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Particles of light that do not make it through the window and which are not reflected by the surface are absorbed into the structure. The excess energy is then radiated away as heat. Sort of. They are absorbed, which means the (electromagnetic) energy is converted into other kinds of energy in the structure, be it raising the orbitals of electrons, wiggling the atoms around a bit, or accelerating it. The excess energy is not really "excess" as there is no amount of energy a structure is "permitted" to have. (not counting enough energy to blow it up. ![]() motion IS heat. One of the ways energy is dissipated is the ratdiation of photons (light, be it infra-red or otherwise), another is physical transfer of momentum (the structure's atoms bounce against air molecules and make the air molecules go faster). There are more. The difference between a particle and a wave is the difference between ripples on the water and the stone you threw in there. No, the stone and the water are different things. But light, whether thought of as waves or as particles, is the same thing. And if you think of light as a particle, you are wrong. If you think of it as a wave, you are also wrong. That's just the way the universe was put together - it's not my fault. g. It is a fundamental axiom of physics that for very small particles you can measure either the wave or the particle, but not both simultaneously. True enough. The reason is there is nothing small enough to see both. Never thought of it that way, but I don't think it's quite right. I thnk the reason is more fundamental. "Stuff" is just made of something we don't understand, and the ways we have though of so far are inadequate when put to the test, though they make perfect sense in the macroscopic sense. The light bulb does not create photons. It emits photons that are already stored in the bulb. The bulb too does create photons... photons that didn't exist before. It does so by resisting the motion of electons, and therefore sucking some of their energy into making the bulb hot, and this releases energy in the form of photons. Ok, so just what IS a photon? Think of an electric field that points up and down, and keeps on switching directions at some rate. Now think of a magnetic field that points left and right, but switches directions at the same rate, just a bit out of phase. As the electric field collapses it generates a magnetic field, and as the magnetic field collapses it generates an electric field, and the two chase each other at the speed of light. It's not a perfect description, but it's pretty close to what a photon is. It takes energy to make these fields wiggle like that, the energy comes from the motion of electons in their orbitals. When things happen just right, the electron collapses, exhausted, back into a lower orbital, and a spurt of energy in the form of the wiggling Electric and Magnetic fields shoots out. A photon has been emitted. That's where they come from. Jose -- (for Email, make the obvious changes in my address) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Teacherjh" wrote in message
When things happen just right, the electron collapses, exhausted, back into a lower orbital, and a spurt of energy in the form of the wiggling Electric and Magnetic fields shoots out. A photon has been emitted. That's where they come from. Pretty cool description, Teach. Heck, my Alabama brain can almost grasp that concept. Unfortunately, when it comes to physics the more I think I grasp, the less I actually grasp. This is called the Aintcertainty Principal. -- Jim Fisher |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Jim Fisher" wrote: Unfortunately, when it comes to physics the more I think I grasp, the less I actually grasp. This is called the Aintcertainty Principal. Tee-hee! Every three or four years I buy one of those "Quantum Mechanics for Laymen" books. I can cram a dim understanding into my brain, but it evaporates quicker than 100LL on a hot ramp. -- Dan C172RG at BFM (remove pants to reply by email) |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Teacherjh" wrote in message ... Ok, so just what IS a photon? A photon is a contrivance that has turned out to be unnecessary. (see "In search of Schrodinger's Kittens") |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "C J Campbell" wrote in message Particles of light that do not make it through the window and which are not reflected by the surface are absorbed into the structure. So, over the course of time your house gets lighter? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Skycraft Landing Light Question | Jay Honeck | Owning | 15 | February 3rd 05 06:49 PM |
The light bulb | Greasy Rider | Military Aviation | 6 | March 2nd 04 12:07 PM |
Effect of Light Sport on General Aviation | Gilan | Home Built | 17 | September 24th 03 06:11 AM |
OT but very funny after some of the posts we have had of late. | Mycroft | Military Aviation | 1 | August 8th 03 10:09 PM |
Ham Radio In The Airplane | Cy Galley | Owning | 23 | July 8th 03 03:30 AM |