How Does Feynman Explain Reflection in Light and Time?

Saw
Gold Member
Messages
631
Reaction score
18
I have been reading the explanation of reflection that Feynman provides in The strange theory of light and matter.

There are two things I do not understand:

a) How does he choose the directions of the little arrows below the diagram? I understand that each path is different in that it takes more or less time to get to the target (the detector). But on which grounds does he associate to this magnitude (time) one or another spatial direction for the arrows?

b) It seems as if the explanation applied regardless the nature of the reflecting surface, i.e., whether it is specular (a mirror) or not. But the fact is that depending on that factor the detector at point P will actually see or not a reflection of the object at point S...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Saw said:
a) How does he choose the directions of the little arrows below the diagram? I understand that each path is different in that it takes more or less time to get to the target (the detector). But on which grounds does he associate to this magnitude (time) one or another spatial direction for the arrows?
They all start at the source pointing in the same (arbitrary) direction, and they all rotate at a constant speed like the hands of a clock, so the direction they're pointing after traveling for a given distance and hence given time is completely determined.

b) It seems as if the explanation applied regardless the nature of the reflecting surface, i.e., whether it is specular (a mirror) or not. But the fact is that depending on that factor the detector at point P will actually see or not a reflection of the object at point S...
The properties of the reflecting surface come into the picture through the "shrink and turn" behavior of the interaction at the surface; differences here will affect the transmission, reflection, and absorption of the incident light.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Nugatory said:
They all start at the source pointing in the same (arbitrary) direction, and they all rotate at a constant speed like the hands of a clock, so the direction they're pointing after traveling for a given distance and hence given time is completely determined.

Thanks. That is very clear.

Nugatory said:
The properties of the reflecting surface come into the picture through the "shrink and turn" behavior of the interaction at the surface; differences here will affect the transmission, reflection, and absorption of the incident light.

More thanks. I was reading an extract and hence missing that part of the explanation. Will retake the full text now and try to understand...
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top