Hey guise, Question about how antennas detect electromagnetic waves?

AI Thread Summary
Antennas detect electromagnetic waves by causing electrons to oscillate in response to the wave's electric and magnetic fields. Unlike cameras, which rely on the absorption of individual photons to create images, antennas interact with a large number of photons, making the concept of "collapse" less applicable. The energy of radio waves is lower than that of light waves, resulting in a higher number of photons per unit of energy, which affects how signals are detected. Digital cameras operate by absorbing energy from EM waves, converting this energy into measurable electrical signals, while maintaining distinct processes from antennas. Understanding the interaction between classical and quantum physics is crucial for grasping these concepts in electromagnetic wave detection.
Jarfi
Messages
384
Reaction score
12
Yer.. I'm lazy and tired, did not enough research and found out that the radio/electromagnetic wave makes all the electrons move back and forth when the wave oscillates between the magnetic and electric fields... so you can see how much the current oscillates etc.

But... um cameras work differently, the wave collapses so you get one signal of a wave and colour, much simpler... what about quantum mechanics, don't the large wavelengths collapse as much?


Well in general I don't know well enough how long wavelength EM-waves are detected, I've seen those pics from deep space where they detected intergalatic radiation.

Anybody care to explain? or give links, names of phenemonas etc? I'm curios I NEED to know this.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Jarfi said:
Yer.. I'm lazy and tired, did not enough research and found out that the radio/electromagnetic wave makes all the electrons move back and forth when the wave oscillates between the magnetic and electric fields... so you can see how much the current oscillates etc.

In order for the electrons to move back and forth, they have to absorb a large number of radio photons. However, there are so many photons in the "radio wave" that the absorption of one or two photons doesn't affect the wave as much. The radio wave changes, but it isn't really a "collapse".

The word "collapse" is accurate only for waves that contain only one particle. If the wave has a sufficiently large amplitude, there are many particles associated with that wave. So the disappearance of one photon in the wave doesn't change the wave in a catastrophic manner.

Jarfi said:
But... um cameras work differently,
No they don't. Not really. The film is exposed by chemical reactions. However, chemical reactions involve electric currents on an atomic and molecular level. The formation of chemical bonds involves electric currents of small spatial extent.

One can get a small amount of distance into this by considering chemical bonds as a type of antennae. I mean, there are differences due to the difference in scale. However, there is a correspondence between the rules of photochemistry and the rules of induction.

In silver nitride crystals, there is a threshold in photon number required before the silver is oxidized. It takes about 10 photons absorbed before a particle of silver nitride changes color. So really, the "collapse" is divided between at least 10 photons. This means that in terms of the electromagnetic field, the photochemical process in standard film can be considered "classical". Quantum mechanics is somewhat involved in modelling the energy levels of the electrons in the silver nitride particles.

Jarfi said:
the wave collapses so you get one signal of a wave and colour, much simpler... what about quantum mechanics, don't the large wavelengths collapse as much?
As a heuristic condition, assume that the threshold energy for detection is about the same in antennae and film. The smaller the frequency, the less energy each photon has. Therefore, there smaller the frequency the more photons there are associated with that small amount of threshold energy.

Radio waves have a smaller energy than light waves. Therefore, radio waves have more photons per unit amount of total energy. Therefore, the "collapse" of anyone photon is less noticeable in radio wave antennae than in light wave film.



Jarfi said:
Well in general I don't know well enough how long wavelength EM-waves are detected, I've seen those pics from deep space where they detected intergalatic radiation.

Anybody care to explain? or give links, names of phenemonas etc? I'm curios I NEED to know this.

I suggest that you try going the other way. Try to look for explanations in "classical electrodynamics" for understanding "optics". Try thinking in classical terms first, and then modifying your thinking to take quantum mechanics into account.

For instance, start thinking of chemical bonds as being like radio wave antennae. Then, add a few changes to your picture to include the effect of photons.
 
Jarfi said:
But... um cameras work differently, the wave collapses so you get one signal of a wave and colour, much simpler... what about quantum mechanics, don't the large wavelengths collapse as much?

Digital cameras work by absorbing energy from EM waves, just like antennas do. The difference is that the wavelength is so small and the energy is so high that instead of getting an AC current, we can get single electrons being knocked around by single photons. Sensors in digital cameras manipulate this to make the electrons get knocked out of one "layer" of the sensor and into another one where it is captured and later measured. The more electrons, the brighter that particular pixel is. Color images are created by putting filters in front of the sensor or even each individual pixel. Typical color cameras have a Bayer Array, which are RGB filters over each pixel. The software in the camera or on your computer can take the raw data, and knowing the pattern of the Bayer Array, convert the image to color.

Also, don't try to mix classical and quantum physics or you will confuse yourself. The EM wave never collapses, as it is not a QM wavefunction.
 
Im still not sure about, how the radio wave creates the current. I am guessing it flies trough the antenna, a certain number of photons in the wave collapse on metals making electrons jump creating current? Or can it create the current without collapsing, and how?

Im currently reading quantum electrodynamics by feynman, and am hoping for some answer... classical physics tend to bore me a bit, at least in school... they treat us like memorizing robots
 
Jarfi said:
Im still not sure about, how the radio wave creates the current. I am guessing it flies trough the antenna, a certain number of photons in the wave collapse on metals making electrons jump creating current? Or can it create the current without collapsing, and how?

Don't try to mix classic and quantum physics. Just think about it as an EM wave that induces a current.
 
Drakkith said:
Don't try to mix classic and quantum physics. Just think about it as an EM wave that induces a current.

Well... all I'm saying is that atoms are quantum mechanical, collapse of photons too? I can't see how else it functions. And how they detect ultra low energy-wavelengths. That is intergalatic radiation, since the energy is too little to cause an electron to jump from an atom in a single low energy wave.

But thanks for the input tho
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top