What Happens to Photon Momentum When Light Travels Through Different Mediums?

  • Thread starter Thread starter flyerpower
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Light Momentum
flyerpower
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
So, photons have zero rest mass, but they never stand still so they have momentum at the speed of light, i quite understand that, and i think it can be derived from this:

[URL]http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/d/2/d/d2dec44ba56c41a31b4d334b144b51d6.png[/URL]
[URL]http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/9/c/3/9c3f2777ac6cb5f4c9c1edc647c68311.png[/URL]

If we plug in v=c in the gamma factor then it turns out that light has some momentum p=(0*c)/0 which is a constant.
But c is the speed of light in vacuum, what if light travels through a medium in which light travels slower than c, then p=(0*v)/gamma, where gamma is not 0 so p=0.

What is going wrong here?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
What's wrong with that is that 0/0 is NOT equal to 1. It does not exist; you cannot divide by 0.
As for non-vacuum, it isn't quite right to say that the speed of light is slower. More precisely, light moves at the speed of light (in vacuum) between atoms, is absorbed by an atom, then, a tiny time later, is ejected from the atom so that the average speed through the material is slower.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
flyerpower said:
So, photons have zero rest mass, but they never stand still so they have momentum at the speed of light, i quite understand that, and i think it can be derived from this:

[PLAIN]http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/d/2/d/d2dec44ba56c41a31b4d334b144b51d6.png[/QUOTE]
That formula only applies to massive particles, for which the speed v is always less than c. For photons, momentum is given by p = E/c (where E is the energy).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
HallsofIvy said:
What's wrong with that is that 0/0 is NOT equal to 1. It does not exist; you cannot divide by 0.

If we plug x=1 in (x-1)/(x^2-1) = 0/0, if we plug in x=0.9 it returns ~0.52, and for x=1.1 it returns ~0.47, and if we want the defined value for that when we plug x=1, we reduce the expression to 1/(x+1) which gives 0.5, so it's a constant. Wouldn't it work in that case too?
 
I've found a number of interesting-sounding papers on the topic of the momentum of light in a refractive medium. Frustratingly, I can't access them in their entirety. Amongst what I found are:

"The momentum of light in a refractive medium" , Peierls, two papers
http://rspa.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/347/1651/475.abstract http://www.jstor.org/pss/79058 http://www.jstor.org/pss/79317

Also, a more recent http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v104/i7/e070401 (and a physicsworld.com article citing it that was ... not very well written.)

Peierls makes the interesting observation that it's not only light that caries the momentum when an electromagnetic wave travels through a medium - motion of the atoms in the medium (or of the medium itself in the continuum approximation) are also generated, in particular acoustic waves (which I assume could also considered to be phonons).

It'd be nice to see a full treatment of the problem that was accessible.

[add]http://www.opticsinfobase.org/aop/abstract.cfm?uri=aop-2-4-519 also looks interesting.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
Back
Top