How Does Polarization Relate to Photon Degeneracy?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jaobyccdee
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Degeneracy Polarization
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the relationship between polarization and photon degeneracy in the context of photon statistics. Participants explore the concept of internal degeneracy, particularly how it relates to the polarization states of photons and the broader implications in systems exhibiting configurational degeneracy.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why the number of possible polarization states of photons is equated with the internal degeneracy of the particle.
  • Another participant explains that degeneracy refers to different states with the same energy, noting that polarization states of photons typically share the same energy, thus constituting a degeneracy.
  • Some participants discuss the distinction between internal degeneracy and configurational degeneracy, suggesting that internal degeneracy relates to intrinsic properties like spin, while configurational degeneracy pertains to macroscopic configurations.
  • A later reply highlights the crossover between microscopic quantum mechanics and macroscopic degrees of freedom, indicating a complex relationship between these concepts.
  • One participant provides an example from ice structure to illustrate configurational degeneracy, explaining how multiple arrangements can lead to the same energy state.
  • Another participant expresses curiosity about the combinatorial aspects of counting degenerate states in such systems.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the terms used, particularly "internal degeneracy" versus "configurational degeneracy." There is no consensus on the implications of these distinctions, and the discussion remains open-ended.

Contextual Notes

The discussion touches on complex concepts that may depend on specific definitions and interpretations of degeneracy, as well as the assumptions underlying the examples provided. The relationship between microscopic and macroscopic states is also noted as a potentially nuanced area requiring further exploration.

jaobyccdee
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
In photon statistics, g is defined as the internal degeneracy per particle, and the text gives the example that photon have two possible polarization states in three space dimensions, thus g=2. Why is the number of possible polarization equals the internal degeneracy of the particle?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Degeneracy just means different states that have the same energy. In most applications, the different polarization states of the photon have the same energy, so that is a degeneracy. I'm not sure why they call it an "internal" degeneracy, I wasn't aware there were any external degeneracies! Perhaps they view spin as something internal, whereas orbital degrees of freedom are external.
 
Ken G said:
I'm not sure why they call it an "internal" degeneracy, I wasn't aware there were any external degeneracies!

They are terming it internal degeneracy as opposed to configurational degeneracy. The latter happens when you have a larger number of macroscopic, equivalent configurations. This is interesting for example in systems showing residual configurational entropy like spin ice.
 
Cthugha said:
They are terming it internal degeneracy as opposed to configurational degeneracy. The latter happens when you have a larger number of macroscopic, equivalent configurations. This is interesting for example in systems showing residual configurational entropy like spin ice.
OK, so there is a formal meaning to the term, thank you. It sounds like the distinctions live in an interesting crossover region between microscopic quantum mechanics and macroscopic degrees of freedom that nevertheless associate with quantized action.
 
Maybe one of the best known examples is ice made from simple water. It is well known that the distance between two Oxygens is roughly 2.76 Angströms, while the OH-bond is roughly 0.95 Angströms. So in ice there are two possible positions for the hydrogen atom along the O-O line: Either at 0.95 Angströms to oxygen atom one and 1.81 Angströms to oxygen atom two or the other way round.

As a consequence in an ice crystal each oxygen atom will have two associated hydrogen atoms at the short distance and two at the long distance, but the exact arrangement is not set as each arrangement fulfilling the above rule leads to the same energy. Therefore you do not get a single ground state when going to 0K, but a huge number of degenerate fround states. You see similar results in spin ice materials like dysprosium titanate.

For some materials the effect can indeed be shown to exist in measurements of the specific heat. However, I suppose, the measurements are no fun.
 
That's quite interesting, I did not know that! Counting those states must be an interesting exercise in combinatorics.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 71 ·
3
Replies
71
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K