Do parallel mirrors keep accelerating away from each other?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the behavior of two parallel mirrors in a vacuum when a beam of light is fired between them. Participants explore whether the mirrors would continuously accelerate away from each other due to radiation pressure from the light bouncing between them, examining the implications of energy transfer and momentum in this scenario.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether the mirrors would continuously accelerate apart, expressing uncertainty about the source of energy for this acceleration.
  • Another participant challenges the initial assumption, asking what leads to the conclusion that they wouldn't accelerate.
  • A participant draws an analogy with paddles and a ping pong ball, suggesting that as the mirrors accelerate, the relative velocity of the light would remain constant, leading to potential perpetual motion.
  • Discussion arises about the redshift of light as the mirrors move apart, with one participant noting that the frequency and wavelength of the light would change, affecting its energy and momentum.
  • One participant claims that the energy of a photon is related to its frequency and discusses the implications of this relationship on the mirrors' kinetic energy.
  • Another participant corrects a previous claim about photon mass, emphasizing that photons have momentum but no rest mass, and that momentum changes rather than mass in this context.
  • A participant introduces an interesting aspect regarding momentum transfer from photons to mirrors, suggesting that if the light is redshifted to zero, all energy could be transferred to the mirrors' kinetic energy.
  • Discussion includes a hypothetical scenario involving a one-way mirror and the implications for energy extraction, with a note that this could violate thermodynamic principles.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the mechanics of light and momentum transfer, with no consensus reached on whether the mirrors would continuously accelerate or the implications of photon behavior in this context.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference concepts such as redshift, energy transfer, and the nature of photons, but there are unresolved mathematical steps and assumptions regarding the behavior of light and mirrors in this scenario.

unlimitedbacon
Messages
4
Reaction score
1
Lets say you have two perfectly reflective parallel mirrors in a frictionless vacuum. You fire off a beam of light between them, so that it bounces between them continuously. Do they continuously accelerate away from each other due to radiation pressure? I think the answer must be no, but I can't figure out why.
 
Science news on Phys.org
What makes you think they won't?
 
Well I don't see where the energy would be coming from. They would both be gaining kinetic energy right?

I took a shower and thought about it a little more. I guess you could pose the same question with two paddles and a ping pong ball. As each paddle accelerates, its velocity relative to the ping pong ball is reduced. So each bounce is not as hard as the last and the velocity of the paddles approaches an upper limit.

With light, though, its velocity from the perspective of each mirror would always be the same (c), right? So it seems like they would just keep accelerating forever, but that can't be right. Can it? It seems very perpetual motiony.
 
unlimitedbacon said:
I took a shower and thought about it a little more. I guess you could pose the same question with two paddles and a ping pong ball. As each paddle accelerates, its velocity relative to the ping pong ball is reduced. So each bounce is not as hard as the last and the velocity of the paddles approaches an upper limit.
As light reflects from a mirror that is receding, what happens to the light's frequency and wavelength?
 
Ok I think I got this. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.

Since the mirrors are moving apart, the light would be redshifted. So the faster the mirrors go, the lower the frequency and longer the wavelength. The energy of a photon is related to its frequency by E = hf (where h is the Planck constant). And its mass is related to its energy by m = E/c^2. So its effectively loosing mass with each bounce, and thus loosing momentum. For a photon moving at c, the momentum p = mc = hf/c^2 * c = hf/c. So it does kinda work the same as the ping pong ball.

Light is weird.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jbriggs444
unlimitedbacon said:
Since the mirrors are moving apart, the light would be redshifted.
Yes, exactly.
 
unlimitedbacon said:
Ok I think I got this. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.

Since the mirrors are moving apart, the light would be redshifted. So the faster the mirrors go, the lower the frequency and longer the wavelength. The energy of a photon is related to its frequency by E = hf (where h is the Planck constant). And its mass is related to its energy by m = E/c^2. So its effectively loosing mass with each bounce, and thus loosing momentum. For a photon moving at c, the momentum p = mc = hf/c^2 * c = hf/c. So it does kinda work the same as the ping pong ball.

Light is weird.

While you get the idea, your explanation is incorrect since you are using a photon mass. https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/do-photons-have-mass.511175/ on this. Photon has no rest mass and so, it cannot work the way you have described. It does, however, have momentum (and yes, a photon can have momentum but with no mass). It is this momentum that is changing in your situation, not its mass.

Zz.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nobody has mentioned an interesting aspect of this scenario. If a photon bounces off a mirror, it transfers momentum p=2hf/c. If it bounces off parallel mirrors a large number of times, the light is redshifted to zero. In that scenario, the total energy of the photon e=hf, is transferred to kinetic energy of the mirrors.

Think of a mirror light sail reflecting star light, as compared to a pair of parallel light sails. The single sail extracts only a tiny fraction of the light's energy. The pair extracts all of it in the form of kinetic energy (if none of the photons are absorbed).

I just thought that was interesting.
 
ZapperZ said:
While you get the idea, your explanation is incorrect since you are using a photon mass. https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/do-photons-have-mass.511175/ on this. Photon has no rest mass and so, it cannot work the way you have described. It does, however, have momentum (and yes, a photon can have momentum but with no mass). It is this momentum that is changing in your situation, not its mass.

Zz.

Maybe I understand this conceptually but not mathematically. I did not think that its rest mass changes. The link says E = pc, so in the end you still get p = E/c = hf/c.

anorlunda said:
Nobody has mentioned an interesting aspect of this scenario. If a photon bounces off a mirror, it transfers momentum p=2hf/c. If it bounces off parallel mirrors a large number of times, the light is redshifted to zero. In that scenario, the total energy of the photon e=hf, is transferred to kinetic energy of the mirrors.

Think of a mirror light sail reflecting star light, as compared to a pair of parallel light sails. The single sail extracts only a tiny fraction of the light's energy. The pair extracts all of it in the form of kinetic energy (if none of the photons are absorbed).

I just thought that was interesting.

Neat. You could inject sunlight into the system by making one of them a one way mirror.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #10
unlimitedbacon said:
You could inject sunlight into the system by making one of them a one way mirror.
A perfectly reflecting (on one side) one-way mirror is a violation of the second law of thermodynamics.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
9K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
12K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K