Are the eyes an example of the photoelectric effect

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around whether the functioning of the eyes can be classified as an example of the photoelectric effect. Participants explore the mechanisms of vision, comparing the eyes to current technology and photosynthesis in terms of light conversion.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested, Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the eyes exemplify the photoelectric effect, suggesting a conversion of light into electrical signals.
  • Others argue that the eyes operate through chemical processes involving opsins, rather than the photoelectric effect.
  • A participant questions whether photons are converted into electrical energy or if the photoelectric effect is somehow expressed by opsins.
  • Another participant clarifies that the photoelectric effect refers to a specific scattering phenomenon, indicating that the mechanisms of vision do not align with this definition.
  • One participant expresses frustration over perceived inaccuracies in the discussion and suggests that others should research the actual workings of the eye.
  • A later reply requests guidance on where to find more information about visual phototransduction.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus; multiple competing views regarding the relationship between the photoelectric effect and the functioning of the eyes remain evident throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the definitions of the photoelectric effect and the specific biological processes involved in vision, which remain unresolved.

dshea
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
It seems to me that the eyes are an example of the photoelectric effect at work. If so, which is more effective; current technology, photosynthesis, or our eyes?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
dshea said:
It seems to me that the eyes are an example of the photoelectric effect at work.

Except that they aren't. Our eyes work by chemical processes involving a protein family called opsins.
 
So the photon's are not being converted into electrical energy? Or is the photoelectric effect being expressed by the opsins? It seems to me that light is being converted to electricity that our brain interprets.
 
the photoelectric effect is not an umbrella term for the conversion of light into movements of electrons. It is the physics of a very specific scattering effect. From what little I know about how the eyes see the work voltage, retarding potential, etc. have nothing to do with it.
 
This is not the way to hold a conversation: writing down incorrect things that "seem to you" to be true, and yet are not. I would start by reading up on how the eye actually does work before posting about how you think it must work.
 
Good point. Can you point me in the right direction?
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Does the Photoelectric Effect Prove the Particle Nature of Light?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad Photoelectric effect -- direction of the electron's trajectory
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Graduate Photoelectric effect in the study of a luminous diode (LED)
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Graduate Explaining the Photoelectric Effect: Why Can't Classical Electromagnetism Do It?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Undergrad Can infrared photons also eject electrons in 'photoelectric effect'?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
High School Photoelectric phenomenum can only be proved as a particle effect?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Undergrad Question about the Photoelectric Effect and the Work Function of a Metal
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Undergrad K-Shell, Low-Energetic Photons & Photoelectric effect
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Graduate Saturation voltage for photoelectric current
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Graduate Photoelectric effect : retarding potential with back current
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K