Does the light transform a matter?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between light and matter, specifically whether light can transform into matter. Participants agree that high-energy photons, such as gamma rays, can create electron-positron pairs, illustrating the conversion of energy into matter. There is debate about whether light itself is energy or simply has energy, with some arguing that light possesses properties like energy but is not equivalent to energy itself. The conversation also touches on concepts like pair production, annihilation of matter and antimatter, and the role of atomic nuclei in these processes. Overall, the thread explores complex ideas in physics regarding the nature of light and its interactions with matter.
canopus
I've been dwelling on this question for hours! Does the light transform a matter? It seems it does... A high energetic photon transform an electron and a positron. Hmm, how can it transform then?

PS:I guess this subject is much suitable for physics.
 
Science news on Phys.org
Light is energy and matter is energy... so maybe. Sorry I'm no more help :)
 
Mass and energy are interchangeable, since light is energy, it can be converted into matter. A very high energetic photon of light (xray, gamma ray) can transform into an electron and positron pair. Light transforming into matter is the opposite of the positron and electron anihhilating each other and being converted into two gamma rays, released in opposite directions.
 
Thanks for the detailed information. It really helped me!
 
ArmoSkater87 said:
Mass and energy are interchangeable, since light is energy, it can be converted into matter.
It is incorrect to say that light is energy. It is correct to say that light has energy.

Pete
 
pmb_phy said:
It is incorrect to say that light is energy. It is correct to say that light has energy.

Pete
This seems to suggest that light is a thing that has the property, energy. But if you remove all the energy from light, what is left?

Keep on chuggin !

Vern
 
Nothing is left (;
 
Vern said:
But if you remove all the energy from light, what is left?
Who, specifically, is this "you" that you are talking to? If it isn't some omnipotent god, then forget it, because the suggestion of removing all energy from light is not very meaningful.
 
  • #10
Light has 0 rest mass, so it is not energy, you have no mass or energy left.
 
  • #11
When antimatter and matter annihilate, they are converted into ENERGY...not something that HAS energy. It so happens that this energy is gamma rays. Therefore light IS energy. If light was something that HAD energy, then if it gave away all of its energy to some substance, there would be a stationary photon left...with no energy, and we all know that this can't be, and isn't true at all.
 
  • #12
Vern said:
This seems to suggest that light is a thing that has the property, energy.
That's like saying that a car as the property of speed. Speed is not an inherent property of a car.
But if you remove all the energy from light, what is left?
No energy, no photon. That can never be taken to mean that a photon and energy are the same exact thing. There is a one-to-one relationship. That is all. There is a one-to-one relationship between the volume of a sphere and the radius of a sphere. No radius - no sphere. But it is incorrect to say that radius and volume are different names for the same thing.
ArmoSkater87 said:
When antimatter and matter annihilate, they are converted into ENERGY...not something that HAS energy.
That is incorrect. See above.
If light was something that HAD energy, then if it gave away all of its energy to some substance, there would be a stationary photon left...with no energy, and we all know that this can't be, and isn't true at all.
That is incorrect. A photon can give up some of its energy, e.g. by scattering off of an electron. An photon can give up all of its energy by being absorbed by an atom. When it does so the photon no longer exists, it doesn't mean that its at rest.

Pete
 
  • #13
pmb_phy said:
That is incorrect. See above.

Pete

what do you mean. When a matter and its anti matter particle anniahlate, they form pure energy.
 
  • #14
one question.
light has 0 rest mass, yes? but light is never at rest... so couldn't you take the mass then as the momentum/c?
but then again, this whole business is quite tricky
 
  • #15
Nenad said:
what do you mean. When a matter and its anti matter particle anniahlate, they form pure energy.

No, they form photons. Photons are not "pure energy", they are...well...photons!

PMB had it just right above: Photons are not energy, they have energy.

Photons have spin and parity too, but we don't say that they are "pure spin" or "pure parity". They have those properties, they are not identical to them.
 
  • #16
Tom Mattson said:
No, they form photons. Photons are not "pure energy", they are...well...photons!

PMB had it just right above: Photons are not energy, they have energy.

Photons have spin and parity too, but we don't say that they are "pure spin" or "pure parity". They have those properties, they are not identical to them.
I forgot to mention that pair production from a single photon can't occur in a vaccum. It must occur near the nucleus of an atom. The nucleus sort of acts like a catalyst in that way. If pair production from a single photon occurred in a vacuum then momentum wouldn't be conserved. The nucleas takes up some of that momentum.

Pete
 
  • #17
who told you that anniahlation of an atimatter and matter particle produces photons?
 
  • #18
Nenad said:
who told you that anniahlation of an atimatter and matter particle produces photons?

QFT and experimental evidence say so. In fact, there's nothing else that a pair can produce when they annihilate, because it would violate known conservation laws.
 
  • #19
daveed said:
one question.
light has 0 rest mass, yes? but light is never at rest... so couldn't you take the mass then as the momentum/c?
but then again, this whole business is quite tricky

No, that would give you the maximum mass into which that photon of light can be transformed into.
 
  • #20
daveed said:
one question.
light has 0 rest mass, yes? but light is never at rest... so couldn't you take the mass then as the momentum/c?
Yes. In fact (relativistic) mass is defined as the m in p = mv. So when v = c -> p = mc or m = p/c.

Pete
 
  • #21
re light = energy

Duality. Wouldn't light be considered energy when it is behaving like a wave, and have energy when it acts like a particle?

I wave can transfer energy from one system to another, while a particle can transfer momentum in the form of thermal energy. So when a light 'particle' strikes a photovoltaic cell (solar cell) to generate current, it would be acting like a wave?

Somebody straighten me out here, I am getting lost.
 
  • #22
red_fox77 said:
Duality. Wouldn't light be considered energy when it is behaving like a wave, and have energy when it acts like a particle?
No. The wave part is statisical only. Too much to explain here what that means and I have to log off now. time to rest. More later.

Pete
 

Similar threads

Can we create matter from light?
Replies
11
Views
3K
I What does a "phase reversal" really do?
Replies
3
Views
2K
The attractive force of photons on other photons & matter
Replies
5
Views
17K
Is Visible Light Bremsstrahlung Observable in Transparent Mediums?
Replies
6
Views
2K
I It's still not clear to me what's the limit of light propagation
Replies
6
Views
2K
I How is IR ink able to be seen with specialized filters?
Replies
3
Views
3K
I Condenser lens retrofit for a lighting application
Replies
24
Views
2K
How does light interact, and travel through Solid matter as
Replies
1
Views
2K
A Electron EM Field as Local Gauge Variation of Electron Matter Field
Replies
6
Views
2K
I How to "think" of a polarizer in matrix representation?
Replies
3
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top