Why Does Light Always Go Straight?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter scilover89
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Light
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the behavior of light, specifically why it appears to travel in straight lines despite the random nature of photon movement. Participants explore concepts from classical optics and quantum mechanics, examining the implications of these theories on the trajectory of light.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that while photons may take random paths, they travel along geodesic paths once a direction is chosen.
  • There is a suggestion that the OP may be conflating random movement with the randomness seen in phenomena like Brownian motion.
  • One participant references Feynman's work, suggesting that light travels in straight lines as an approximation, with quantum mechanics indicating that photons can take various trajectories, but are most likely to travel straight.
  • Another participant questions the speed of photons on these alternative paths, leading to a discussion about the speed of light.
  • Some participants discuss Feynman's sum-over-histories approach, mentioning that photons can theoretically take paths faster or slower than the speed of light, though there is uncertainty about the implications for photons specifically.
  • There is a clarification that quantum mechanics involves strict rules governing behavior, countering the notion that photon movement is purely random.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of photon movement, with some emphasizing randomness and others highlighting the structured rules of quantum mechanics. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these perspectives on the straight-line behavior of light.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various interpretations of quantum mechanics and classical optics, indicating a dependence on theoretical frameworks that may not be universally agreed upon. There are also unresolved questions about the speed of photons on different paths.

scilover89
Messages
78
Reaction score
0
In normal condition, light always go straight. But since photon move randomly, why must they go straight?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
scilover89 said:
But since photon move randomly

What do you mean by this ?
 
Straight with respect to what? Photons usually do take random paths, but they travel on geodesic paths once they chose a course. After that, they appear to travel along the same path, until disturbed.
 
I think the OP may be confusing the random choice of a direction with the randomness that is associated with Brownian motion or the drunken walk.
 
I think what the thread starter wanted is actually said in one of Feynman's books. In classical optics, light is seen as traveling in straight lines, but that is shows as an approximation of what really happens. Using the principle of least action, light does indeed travel in a straight line since that's the easiest path to travel.

But according to QM, a photon can take several crazy trajectories, but if looking at the probability cloud of a photon, its mostly concentrated in a straight line. So in the context of QM, light doesn't really travel in straight lines, it just MOST PROBABLY would travel in a straight line.

Am i right on this one?
 
^ at what speed does it travel on those other paths?
 
"c" 299 792 458 m/s
 
A photon in Feynman's sum-over-histories has countless paths faster and slower than the speed-of-light that combine to give the speed-of-light path.

We have to be careful not to think of a particle as having anything like a definite position and velocity at the same time, though, but we can describe it as series of definite positions at all times so as to make up these paths for the sum-over-histories, I think.
 
Last edited:
caribou said:
A photon in Feynman's sum-over-histories has countless paths faster and slower than the speed-of-light that combine to give the speed-of-light path.

Really? I did not know this. Could you elaborate more on this or maybe suply me with a link. If this topic has a name I'll google it.
 
  • #10
Actually, the "slower than light" bit I mention might not be right for photons. I remember now that was something I meant to check to see if it was a possibility. Oops. :blushing:

I know that faster than light and even backwards in time histories are correct and appear in a sum-over-histories, though. :smile:
 
Last edited:
  • #11
Professor Feynman to the rescue! I was right about the slower than light histories for photons in a sum-over-histories. That's a relief. :biggrin:

To quote Richard Feynman "...there is also an amplitude for light to go faster (or slower) than the conventional speed of light. You found out in the last lecture that light doesn't go only in straight lines; now, you find out that it doesn't go only at the speed of light! It may surprise you that there is an amplitude for a photon to go at speeds faster or slower than the conventional speed, c." - Chapter 3, page 89 of Richard Feynman's book "QED".

Got that from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster_than_light
 
Last edited:
  • #12
scilover89 said:
In normal condition, light always go straight. But since photon move randomly, why must they go straight?

"Momentum" is the explanation that usually serves my purpose.
 
  • #13
Photons do not move randomly. QM is not just all about randomness - there are very strict rules about how objects can behave. In order to decide the probability that some system will start in classical state A and end in classical state B, we do the Feynman cookbooking (i.e. [tex]e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}S}[/tex] where S is the classical action of that history, and then sum this value for every possible history to get the probability (to within some proportionalirt factor) that the system will truly go from state A to state B). So it's not all random, there are precise rules. It was designed so that for macroscopic systems, the outcome is exactly the same as the classical outcome.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
4K
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K