Comparing Photons & EM Waves in Physics

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the wave-particle duality of light, exploring fundamental concepts in electromagnetic (EM) theory and particle physics, particularly in relation to photons and EM waves. Participants raise questions about the generation of EM waves and photons, their properties, and the underlying physics, including references to the Bohr model and Maxwell's equations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that EM waves are generated by free charged particles, while photons are associated with electrons bound to a nucleus.
  • One participant asserts that EM waves and photons are fundamentally the same, suggesting that light can be treated as either depending on the context.
  • Questions are raised about the nature of electric and magnetic fields, including whether they oscillate in phase and how they relate to the propagation of photons.
  • There is a discussion about the conditions under which an electric field exists and whether it requires two charged particles or can be associated with a single particle.
  • Some participants express uncertainty regarding the relationship between photon energy and the oscillating EM fields, questioning how these concepts reconcile.
  • Clarifications are provided about the properties of photons, including their lack of rest mass and the nature of their propagation.
  • One participant mentions that while classical wave descriptions are often used for convenience, quantum mechanical descriptions can also explain wave-like behaviors such as diffraction.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between EM waves and photons, with some asserting they are the same while others highlight distinctions. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing perspectives on the nature of light and its duality.

Contextual Notes

Some claims made by participants contain assumptions that may not be universally accepted, such as the conditions under which electric fields exist and the implications of photon behavior in various contexts. There are also references to exceptions in the behavior of EM waves that are not fully explored.

  • #31
meopemuk said:
If the "wave" you are talking about is an abstract mathematical thing that is found only in QM equations, but not in nature, then I agree. However, I wouldn't like to think that real electron is such a wave, that electron's charge is really spread out over large volume, and that at the instant of the "click" this "cloud" collapses to a point. This weird behavior is OK for the wave treated as a mathematical abstraction, but it doesn't look OK if the wave is a real physical object.
Ok, infact I don't say the wave is a real physical object, but, in the same way, you can't say that [what you mean with "particle"] is a real physical object, in my hopinion, since the only physical object here is the "click" of the detector. Don't you agree?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
lightarrow said:
Ok, infact I don't say the wave is a real physical object, but, in the same way, you can't say that [what you mean with "particle"] is a real physical object, in my hopinion, since the only physical object here is the "click" of the detector. Don't you agree?

But the "particle" in question is defined as having a localized energy, and a "click" in a detector at a particular location is consistent with such a definition. The "wave" of light that is commonly used is a realwave that exists in real space, i.e. it is similar to seeing water waves. This is NOT the wavefunction of light as described in QM, which exists in configuration space. That is the distinction that is being confused here.

Zz.
 
  • #33
lightarrow said:
Ok, infact I don't say the wave is a real physical object, but, in the same way, you can't say that [what you mean with "particle"] is a real physical object, in my hopinion, since the only physical object here is the "click" of the detector. Don't you agree?

I think we can agree here. "Clicks" is the only objective reality that we observe. Both "particles" and "waves" are simply mental constructs that we invent to visualize our mathematical description of "clicks". In my opinion the notion of "particles" makes this visualization more clear and less contradictory.
 

Similar threads

High School Frequency of an EM wave in Classical and Quantum Physics
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Undergrad How does EM wave geometrical attenuation affect atomic absorption?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Undergrad The Speed of Light: Comparing Photon and EM Wave Velocities
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
Undergrad Frequency of EM waves in classical and quantum physics
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
Undergrad QED Picture of static EM Fields
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Undergrad "Wave-particle duality" and double-slit experiment
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
8K
High School Question re photons/EM waves and the double slit experiment
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Undergrad Schrödinger equation and classical wave equation
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
Undergrad Why do photons interact with e- but not with other photons?
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
Undergrad EM Wave Components for a Photon?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K