Is light a photon or a wave? (concrete question)

  • Thread starter Thread starter nonequilibrium
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Light Photon Wave
nonequilibrium
Messages
1,412
Reaction score
2
Don't worry, my question is not as vague or typical as the title might suggest:

We know Mawell's equations describe light as waves. Waves can be described as excitations of normal modes (for reasons that are not yet entirely clear to me; references are welcome). This is described by the harmonic oscillator. Actually, this needs to be described by a quantum harmonic oscillator. It turns out, in statistical mechanics, that the statistics predicted by the quantum harmonic oscillator are the same as those predicted by boson statistics as applied to massless particles (under certain conditions). This motivates how the classical idea leads to the idea of photons.

Good. Of course, the above result can be interpreted in two ways: either it's really a wave but the math coincides with that of a particle. Or it is really a photon but the math coincides with that of a wave. Is one view preferred above the other? I predict some will say "but how can we tell the difference if we've just proven that the two ideas are indistinguishable", but then I ask: aren't there certain conditions for the above argument? I expect that some conditions will break the equivalence, in which case we can experimentally prefer one above the other. Has such a thing happened?

EDIT: maybe I can rephrase it succintly: is either the excitation (the wave view) or the photon (the particle view) an approximation for the other?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The only thing that can answer a question about reality is a theory that defines the terms used in the question. In this case, the key term is "light". The only theories that have anything useful to say are classical electrodynamics and quantum electrodynamics. The former says that light consists of waves. The latter says that light consists of photons (and also defines the term "photon"). Quantum electrodynamics is much better at predicting results of experiments.
 
Light propagates as an EM wave, as described by Maxwell.
The amplitude of the wave is quantized, so its energy equals n hbar\omega.
For n=1, it describes the propagation of a photon, in the same way that Schrodinger's equation describes the propagation of an electron.
 
What do we mean when we call light a wave? We mean it's extended in space, it can superimpose with another light wave, giving interference, diffraction pattern etc. But all these features are inherited by quantum mechanical discription, with some additional properties that resemble particles(amplitude got discretized , so concepts of "wave" and "particle" are not mutually exclusive, and the quantum mechanical description is more complete.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Thread 'Lesser Green's function'
The lesser Green's function is defined as: $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\langle C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(t')C_{\nu}(t)\rangle=i\bra{n}C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(t')C_{\nu}(t)\ket{n}$$ where ##\ket{n}## is the many particle ground state. $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\bra{n}e^{iHt'}C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(0)e^{-iHt'}e^{iHt}C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt}\ket{n}$$ First consider the case t <t' Define, $$\ket{\alpha}=e^{-iH(t'-t)}C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt}\ket{n}$$ $$\ket{\beta}=C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt'}\ket{n}$$ $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\bra{\beta}\ket{\alpha}$$ ##\ket{\alpha}##...
Back
Top