Can HUP Explain the Instant Emission of Photoelectrons?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the implications of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (HUP) in the context of the photoelectric effect, specifically addressing the instantaneous emission of photoelectrons when exposed to a long sinusoidal electromagnetic (EM) wave. Participants explore the relationship between the length of the EM wave, the uncertainty in energy and time, and the timing of electron emission.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that a long EM wave leads to a low energy uncertainty, suggesting that the time required for energy measurement should be high, which raises the question of why photoelectrons are emitted almost instantly.
  • Others clarify that the HUP relates the energy spectrum to the time spectrum, emphasizing that the wavelength does not directly affect this relationship.
  • A participant points out that while the electron emission appears instantaneous, there is uncertainty regarding the exact timing of the emission due to the nature of the photon absorption process.
  • Some participants propose that the uncertainty in the timing of electron emission is consistent with the uncertainty associated with the originating photon, indicating that the arrival time of the electron cannot be predicted precisely.
  • One participant provides an example involving a long wave train and discusses how the duration of the wave affects the timing of electron emission, noting that repeated experiments yield varying arrival times for emitted electrons.
  • Another participant discusses the mathematical treatment of finite wave packets in the photoelectric effect, mentioning that the standard approach assumes pure plane waves and how this affects the momentum and spatial characteristics of the emitted electrons.
  • There is a suggestion that if the photon is treated as a pure plane wave, the delta time could be considered infinite, although this point is contested.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of the HUP regarding the timing of electron emission and the relationship between wave length and uncertainty. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives on how these concepts interact.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on definitions of wave length and wave train length, as well as the unresolved mathematical steps in the treatment of finite wave packets versus pure plane waves.

lightarrow
Messages
1,966
Reaction score
64
A sinusoidal EM wave which length l is very great, hits a photoelectric device.

According to HUP, a sinusoidal EM wave with finite length l has a spectrum of frequencies which broadness is inversely proportional to l. So, if l is very great, the energy uncertainty is very low, and this, still for HUP, should mean that the time required to make that energy measurement is high. Or not?

If this were true, why, instead,the photoelectrons are emitted almost instantly?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
lightarrow said:
According to HUP, a sinusoidal EM wave with finite length l has a spectrum of frequencies which broadness is inversely proportional to l.

The HUP does *not* say that there is a connection between a photon's frequency "spectrum" and its wavelength. The HUP says there is a relationship between the frequency (actually energy) spectrum and the time spectrum.

[tex]\Delta E \Delta t & \ge \frac{\hbar}{2}[/tex]

If you work through it, you will see that the wavelength itself is not a factor, even though wavelength and frequency themselves are inversely proportional. I.e. it is the deltas that are related by the HUP.
 
DrChinese said:
The HUP does *not* say that there is a connection between a photon's frequency "spectrum" and its wavelength. The HUP says there is a relationship between the frequency (actually energy) spectrum and the time spectrum.

[tex]\Delta E \Delta t & \ge \frac{\hbar}{2}[/tex]

If you work through it, you will see that the wavelength itself is not a factor, even though wavelength and frequency themselves are inversely proportional. I.e. it is the deltas that are related by the HUP.
In my post I talked about the length l of the wave train, not the wavelength. Probably I didn't explain well.
 
lightarrow said:
If this were true, why, instead,the photoelectrons are emitted almost instantly?
And since as you put it the electron is produce "almost instantly" you must have some uncertainty about when it is, and I assume you have some uncertainty about where it or its energy is. Sounds consistent with the uncertainty defined with the originating photon, enough so as to not be able to question “why”.
 
lightarrow said:
If this were true, why, instead,the photoelectrons are emitted almost instantly?

Yes, the length of the EM wave train is very long so delta E is very small. This means that the time at which the photon is absorbed (and the electron is emitted) is very imprecise. The HUP implication is not that the electron is spread out in time, but instead that the arrival time of the electron cannot be predicted in advance. And the energy of the electron is not ill defined, just the time that it arrives relative to the duration of the EM wave. If you run the experiment many times you will get many different electron arrival times. Let me explain this in more detail.

For example, suppose the wave is 500 feet long, and consists of a single photon. The wave takes about 500ns to pass a point in space, so you cannot expect the electron to appear except within a period of time of 500ns. If you run the experiment, you will find that the electron is emitted at various times, depending on how lucky you are.

Now anyone of those electrons will be measured to arrive at a very specific time. For exmple, one run might detect the electron at 139ns +- 1ns after the beginning of the wave train. But the +- 1ns is not the delta t of the HUP. The +- 1ns is the inaccuracy in your measurement apparatus. The delta t of the HUP is the fact that the photon is annihilated and the energetic electron appears at any time in that 500 ns.

Is that the explanation you were looking for?
 
CarlB said:
Yes, the length of the EM wave train is very long so delta E is very small. This means that the time at which the photon is absorbed (and the electron is emitted) is very imprecise. The HUP implication is not that the electron is spread out in time, but instead that the arrival time of the electron cannot be predicted in advance. And the energy of the electron is not ill defined, just the time that it arrives relative to the duration of the EM wave. If you run the experiment many times you will get many different electron arrival times. Let me explain this in more detail.

For example, suppose the wave is 500 feet long, and consists of a single photon. The wave takes about 500ns to pass a point in space, so you cannot expect the electron to appear except within a period of time of 500ns. If you run the experiment, you will find that the electron is emitted at various times, depending on how lucky you are.

Now anyone of those electrons will be measured to arrive at a very specific time. For exmple, one run might detect the electron at 139ns +- 1ns after the beginning of the wave train. But the +- 1ns is not the delta t of the HUP. The +- 1ns is the inaccuracy in your measurement apparatus. The delta t of the HUP is the fact that the photon is annihilated and the energetic electron appears at any time in that 500 ns.

Is that the explanation you were looking for?
Yes, but not with a 500 feet long photon, with a 500 light seconds long one.
 
lightarrow said:
Yes, but not with a 500 feet long photon, with a 500 light seconds long one.

500 feet is already very very long compared to the wavelength of light, and so the delta E of light is very accurately determined. (I.e. something like 1 part in 10^8).

If you make the light wavetrain instead be 500 seconds long, it just makes delta E that much smaller, and correspondingly increases the length of time over which the electron may arrive (i.e. it increases the delta t).
 
The standard way to do photoelectric assumes pure plane waves for the incident photon and the emittted electron. When you restrict the photon to a finite spatial range you get a term like sinkr1/kr1 - sinkr2/kr2 rather than the usual momentum delta function. r1-r2 is the length of the incident wave packet.(Don't worry, momentum is still conserved.Recall that the incident photon is in a state that encompasses all frequencies from 0 to infinity.So the term above needs to be integrated over the photon spectra) So the finite wavetrain will kick out an electron, with a probability dependent upon the momentum and the spatial characteristics of the incident wave train.

I'll leave it at that.

Re the HUP, first it is built into the computation of the matrix element. And, in fact, with a bit of effort, you can trace a Gaussian (or any other packet) to see how the uncertainties propagate through the system.

Regards,
Reilly Atkinson
 
reilly said:
The standard way to do photoelectric assumes pure plane waves for the incident photon and the emittted electron.

Regards,
Reilly Atkinson
So [tex]\Delta t[/tex] should be infinite in that case?
 
  • #10
Yes, delta t is infinite.
 
  • #11
Thanks to all for your answers.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
22K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
24K