Energy in waves (Amplitude and Frequency)

[DarkDrag0nite]

---------- About Mechanics waves ---------

We know that in mechanics waves, energy is proportion to Amplitude^2.
So we can write equation as E = kA^2 , where k is a constant.

Is it possible to find this constant (k) ?
Is k different in other waves (meaning it is depended on other values) or it is constant to all mechanics waves ?

---------- About Electromagnetics waves ---------

Does "Energy proportion to Amplitude^2" also apllied to ElectroMagnetics waves ?

Is the result of photoelectric effect meaning that energy of EM waves is not proportion to amplitude but only frequency ?

Will the calculation be accurated if I calculate energy from Amplitude^2 in EM waves ?

Thank in advance.

 

[Dr_Morbius]

In electromagnetic waves the energy is proportional to the frequency, E=hf.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_radiation

 

[Drakkith]

Does amplitude have any meaning for a photon?

 

[LostConjugate]

In electromagnetic waves the energy is proportional to the frequency, E=hf.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_radiation

h taking the place of A^2 as the smallest measurable density.

The energy of any wave is proportional to the product of the density(amplitude) and the frequency.

 

[Drakkith]

h taking the place of A^2 as the smallest measurable density.

The energy of any wave is proportional to the product of the density(amplitude) and the frequency.

Yes but for an EM wave does that mean that the amplitude is always set to a certain value?

 

[LostConjugate]

Yes but for an EM wave does that mean that the amplitude is always set to a certain value?

No, not at all. The particle view attempts to break down the EM wave into a collection of particles. The Amplitude is now the density of particles, each particle having the minimum measurable amplitude and only differing in frequency.

It is just a point of view.

 

[Drakkith]

No, not at all. The particle view attempts to break down the EM wave into a collection of particles. The Amplitude is now the density of particles, each particle having the minimum measurable amplitude and only differing in frequency.

It is just a point of view.

So the amplitude of a single photon is set then?

 

[LostConjugate]

Hold on, are you talking about a collection of photons or about just one?

I was talking about a collection of photons, that is what an EM wave is right?

 

[LostConjugate]

So the amplitude of a single photon is set then?

Yup, it is the smallest measurable amplitude of an EM wave. Plank's constant

 

[Drakkith]

I was talking about a collection of photons, that is what an EM wave is right?

Not really. An EM wave to me means a photon. But I could be incorrect.

Yup, it is the smallest measurable amplitude of an EM wave. Plank's constant

Ok, so Planks constant, AKA the amplitude, helps defines the energy of a particle because a higher frequency would have more waves per second, more peaks or whatever?

 

[LostConjugate]

Not really.



Ok, so Planks constant, AKA the amplitude, helps defines the energy of a particle because a higher frequency would have more waves per second, more peaks or whatever?

The frequency is the velocity of the source charge, or the rate of change of the wave function. Combine this with the amplitude^2 to get your energy.

In the particle view, the particles have the lowest measurable amplitude, empirically found to be plank's constant.

 

[LostConjugate]

Not really. An EM wave to me means a photon. But I could be incorrect.

A photon is the quanta of an EM wave.

Edit: it is nothing like a wave.

 

[Drakkith]

A photon is the quanta of an EM wave.

Edit: it is nothing like a wave.

Hrmm. I am unsure about this. A photon is quantized, but I think that the photon IS the EM wave.

 

[DarkDrag0nite]

Thank everyone.

Is the result of photoelectric effect meaning that energy of EM waves is not proportion to amplitude but only frequency ?

But I think I am missing some important point of Photoelectric effect. Isn't that means amplitude is not proportion to energy ?

 

[Drakkith]

Thank everyone.



But I think I am missing some important point of Photoelectric effect. Isn't that means amplitude is not proportion to energy ?

That is correct. The change in wavelength determines the amount of change in energy of an EM wave. (Photon) Double the frequency (half the wavelength) and you double the energy.

 

[maruthisarat]

somebody tell me what is the value of "k".
It is constant (or) varies with materials?

 

[DarkDrag0nite]

That is correct. The change in wavelength determines the amount of change in energy of an EM wave. (Photon) Double the frequency (half the wavelength) and you double the energy.

Anyway, Wavelength and Amplitude are different.

 

[LostConjugate]

somebody tell me what is the value of "k".
It is constant (or) varies with materials?

k would be your frequency. The material is not usually taken into account with mechanical waves when determining the energy transferred through the material, it is usually taken to be some material that is good at transferring energy. If you want to look into inefficiencies in the material first you take the mechanical wave energy and then you apply inefficiencies in some complex manner.