Does a stationary charge in a gravitational field emit radiation?

[atyy]

The instructor also recommends as excellent reading on this subject: G. Greenstein and A.G. Zajonc, “The Quantum Challenge” (Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 2005).

This is the same reference I gave in post #51. The reference states that quantization of the electromagnetic field is not necessary to explain the photoelectric effect (there's a caveat to this, but it's not relevant at this point).

 

[bcrowell]

This is the same reference I gave in post #51. The reference states that quantization of the electromagnetic field is not necessary to explain the photoelectric effect (there's a caveat to this, but it's not relevant at this point).

I've started a thread about this in the quantum physics forum. The problem with the Scully-Lamb model is that it violates conservation of energy.

I wasn't able to access anything via the link in your #51, but I was able to find the book on amazon, which let me see certain pages. However, I was unable to see the page where they give their reference [1]. Do you have the actual book, and is reference [1] the internal report that's been floating around? I was able to access the pages where they present the idea, and it's basically just a summary of the internal report. They ignore the same issue Scully and Lamb ignore, which is that the hybrid model violates conservation of energy.

 

[atyy]

IDo you have the actual book, and is reference [1] the internal report that's been floating around?

I haven't got the book, was browsing at Borders some time ago which is when I came across their discussion.

 

[bcrowell]

I haven't got the book, was browsing at Borders some time ago which is when I came across their discussion.

It's funny trying to access this information through "keyholes" like amazon and google books. Although I couldn't access the book through google books at home, I am able to access it through google books here at work. Right after the section on the photoelectric effect, they have a section called "anticoincidences," which makes essentially the same point I'm making. Anyway, the Quantum Physics forum is really the right place to continue this discussion.