Understanding Energy Transferring

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the nature of photons and how they transfer energy from the sun to objects like ice cubes. It clarifies that each photon carries a specific frequency and energy, and the sun emits a vast number of photons across the electromagnetic spectrum, with most energy traveling via these photons. When photons hit an ice cube, they excite the molecules, causing the ice to melt due to thermal energy rather than direct electron transitions. The conversation also touches on the difference between instantaneous energy release and the gradual release of absorbed energy, suggesting that environmental factors influence this process. Overall, the thread seeks to clarify fundamental concepts of energy transfer and photon behavior.
timetravel_0
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
I do a lot of random thinking - and to disclaim myself, I have no formal education on any physics. Everything I know is self-taught, so bare with me. The question I might ask my very well be worded wrong and sound stupid.

My main question is: From what I understand - the sun(and other stars) emit a specific range of energy from the electromagnetic spectrum. Does a single photon contain all of that energy, or just a specific wavelength of that energy and its the packet that contains the full range? And does all(most) energy from the sun travel via photons?

I understand that solar flares would contain energy and that would be another form of transferring energy - but I just want to see if I understand photons and energy transferring correctly.

Ok, let's say I set a ice cube on the ground out in the sun. Ignoring the thermal energy coming from the ground - from what I understand - the photons with their energy travel and hit the ice cube. The electrons in the atoms on the surface of the ice cube absorb this energy where when high enough the electron cloud jumps up one level, and as energy is being released the electron cloud drops back down causing another photo to be emitted - probably a poor explanation of the photoelectric effect - but I'm doing my best.

So, then some of the energy that is absorbed causes the molecules to loosen their bonds causing the ice to melt into water, and the the water into steam. Heat is felt on the steam because of the excess energy it contains - the energy is transferred from the steam to the air around it by the interacting electrons, and then from the air to your hand.

Ok so basically depending on the color of an object will determine the amount of energy absorbed and the amount of energy ejected/rejected/reflected.

Which brings me to my next question. Is all "rejected" energy light? I'd imagine I could answer that question my self because of hearing echoes and sounds from the living room as I type this... I assume if "radio" energy is emitted from the sun, as I assume it does, it would behave similarly - which is why microwaves heat food containing water... the water absorbs the energy which producing heat...

Now, why is it that photo energy is released or "rejected" instantaneously but absorbed energy is released over time?

I guess the release of absorbed energy is dependant on the environment around it?

So like in a vacuum the energy absorbed would remain absorbed and never release its energy - I'm assuming that if the absorption become saturated it will it release energy?? Kind like a light bulb on how the filament glows and heat is released. Outside the vacuum the filament would release its energy in the presents of oxygen which would cause it to rapidly heat up and burn... I get that much... hmmm

Geez I ask to many questions I know. I'm just trying to see if I understand this all.

I don't know if this post has direction or can be discussed in any way... but please give me some insight and corrections. Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm having a hard time understanding what you are really asking about- are you asking if light possesses energy?
 
I'll try to bear with you :P

timetravel_0 said:
My main question is: From what I understand - the sun(and other stars) emit a specific range of energy from the electromagnetic spectrum. Does a single photon contain all of that energy, or just a specific wavelength of that energy and its the packet that contains the full range? And does all(most) energy from the sun travel via photons?
Each photon (in any situation) has a particular frequency and a particular energy (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon); the range of frequencies (wavelengths) and the intensity of the total energy emitted is created by emitting LARGE numbers of photons (very roughly, something like 10^50 photons/second). A "packet" isn't a clear thing, its often used to refer to a single photon.
Very nearly-all of the sun's energy comes through photons, yes (the solar wind carries some too).

timetravel_0 said:
Ok, let's say I set a ice cube on the ground out in the sun... The electrons in the atoms on the surface of the ice cube absorb this energy where when high enough the electron cloud jumps up one level... So, then some of the energy that is absorbed causes the molecules to loosen their bonds causing the ice to melt into water.
When an electron absorbs the energy of a photon to move to a higher energy level, that's called "line absorption," and has little to do with the melting of the ice. The ice melts because (as you say) the molecules are excited thermally (they get hit by a photon, and start moving faster), weakening the intermolecular forces (not bonds) which hold the molecules in the crystal structure of ice.

timetravel_0 said:
Now, why is it that photo energy is released or "rejected" instantaneously but absorbed energy is released over time?
"Rejection" is not a physical property, I don't know what you're talking about--sorry. Try reading this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_constant#Black-body_radiation

You might enjoy grabbing a physics textbook and working through it.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...
Back
Top