Light Momentum Confusion: Proving with Math/Eqns

In summary, light has momentum and this can be proven using the four-momentum in relativity, where the first component is the energy of the photon and the other three components are momenta in the directions of the three spatial axes. This is different from the equation p=(mv)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) which only applies to massive particles and cannot be used for light. The concept of light having momentum is an empirical science and cannot be proven solely through math and equations.
  • #1
Irfan Nafi
34
0
In E2=m2c4+p2c2
how do you prove light has momentum? I've tried but my answer comes to be undefined. Light has m=0, so you're left with p2c2. p=(mv)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) When substituting values of light you get that p=0/0. How do you prove light has momentum using math and equations?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The expression for momentum for photons in QM is ##p=\hbar k##. Where ##k## is the wave number (##k=\frac{2\pi}{\lambda}##) and ##\hbar## is the Planck constant divided by ##2\pi## . Or equivalently, ##p=\frac{h}{\lambda}## . Your equation for ##p## is for massive particles with non zero rest mass.
Edit: Also note that in your expression for p if you put v=c (photon) then you get a division by zero! It is good to check for these stuff when you are doing calculations.
Edit 2: Sorry I thought that this was posted in QM section. Apologies.
 
  • Like
Likes Irfan Nafi
  • #3
In relativity, p is not necessarily obtained by multiplying mass by velocity.

For a photon, instead we work with the four-momentum, the first component ##p^0## of which, in any reference frame, is the energy of the photon in that frame. The other three components ##p^1,p^2,p^3## are momenta in the directions of the three spatial axes of the frame. We want the four-momentum to be a null vector (vector of zero magnitude), because light travels along null geodesics. So that means that not all the other three components of the four momentum can be zero - since the first component (Energy) ##p^0## is nonzero. If we rotate the frame so that the x spatial axis points in the direction of the photon's travel, we know that the other two momentum components ##p^2,p^3## must be zero, and we conclude that ##p^1=p^0## where ##p^0=E=h\nu## is the photon's energy.
 
  • #4
Irfan Nafi said:
p=(mv)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
This is a relation that only holds fot massive particles. You cannot use it for light.

Irfan Nafi said:
I've tried but my answer comes to be undefined. Light has m=0, so you're left with p2c2
Yes, and so you are done. If light carries energy, then it carries momentum p=E/c.

Irfan Nafi said:
How do you prove light has momentum using math and equations?

You don't. This is not how physics works, it is an empirical science. Your theory makes a prediction and you test it in the lab.
 
  • Like
Likes Irfan Nafi
  • #5
andrewkirk said:
instead we work with the four-momentum
I strongly suspect that this will pass over the head of the OP in a B level thread ...
 

What is light momentum confusion?

Light momentum confusion is a phenomenon where people often have a misconception that light has momentum, despite it being massless. This confusion arises from the fact that light can exert pressure on objects, giving the illusion of having momentum.

Why is it important to prove light momentum confusion with math and equations?

Proving light momentum confusion with math and equations helps to clarify the misconception and provide a deeper understanding of the concept. It also allows for a more precise and accurate explanation of the phenomenon.

Which equations are used to prove light momentum confusion?

The equations used to prove light momentum confusion are the momentum equation (p = mv) and the energy-momentum relation (E = pc). These equations show that for a particle with zero mass (such as a photon), the momentum is also zero.

How does the math behind light momentum confusion work?

The math behind light momentum confusion involves using the equations mentioned above and substituting values for the speed of light, mass, and momentum. By doing so, it becomes clear that light does not have momentum due to its lack of mass.

Why is it difficult to grasp the concept of light having no momentum?

It is difficult to grasp the concept of light having no momentum because we are used to thinking of momentum as a measure of an object's movement, and light clearly moves. However, momentum is also a measure of an object's mass, and since light has no mass, it cannot have momentum.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
4
Replies
131
Views
9K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
65
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
64
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
15
Views
474
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
21
Views
610
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
36
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
15
Views
1K
Back
Top