How does the electron come back down in energy level after absorbing a photon?

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
37 replies · 8K views
BVirtual said:
Even humans disagree on what frequencies are in each "color NAME BAND." Most 'city' people see 5 greens or so, while native tribes living in the forest will name more than 20 green colors by different names, even over 30 different greens. And each member of the same tribe will have agreement between them.
Which is a very good reason not to use colour as experimental data (except in [Edit: colourimetric ] applications). However would the vital relationship E = hf have been found if the experimenters (physicists) had tried it with rainbow colours? The title of this forum has the word Physics in it so we are aiming to promote Physics and not easy alternatives. The colours are, of course relevant and useful for descriptions but not for theory. If you don't find theory important then stick with colours and avoid trying to 'educate' other people about Physics. It really doesn't help them.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes. PF is a website with policies for each of each of its Forums to match the target audience that is desired by the Moderators. Some PF Forums are homework help where adherence is demanded to textbook and citation references in specialty fields of physics. Other Forums are for professionals within the specialty field. These Forums must promote posts with insight to the proper conceptual understanding within that specialty field. Thus, your desire to promote quantitative analysis using frequency over color. A good thing for professionals.

I never thought that someone might use "color names" for quantitative analysis. Never occurred to me, until this thread. I was glad when you mentioned your context of quantitative analysis. That was the turning point in this dialogue.

For me it is a given that analysis with mathematical precision is done with numbers, not conceptual words.

Where qualitative analysis is mostly word based. Color names can be accepted, but only roughly.

It has been a real pleasure for me SophieCentaur to dialogue with you in this thread, as you are able to have a productive dialogue that includes correcting both objective and subjective misunderstandings. A rare skill.
 
BVirtual said:
Thus, your desire to promote quantitative analysis using frequency over color. A good thing for professionals.
This suggests to me that you just don't want to get your hands dirty with 'actual maths'. I can safely say that no advance in Physics has ever ben achieved with arm waving, non-quantitive thinking. If you want to be listened to seriously in these matters or to have understanding you will need to be prepared for calculations and formulae. Your "professionals" are just genuine (or aspiring) Scientists.
The very least you can do is to use terms that are appropriate for any message you want to get across. Do not confuse the result (observed colour, for instance) with any 'explanation' in terms of Physics you may feel you have.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: hutchphd
sophiecentaur said:
Which is a very good reason not to use colour as experimental data (except in [Edit: colourimetric ] applications). However would the vital relationship E = hf have been found if the experimenters (physicists) had tried it with rainbow colours? The title of this forum has the word Physics in it so we are aiming to promote Physics and not easy alternatives. The colours are, of course relevant and useful for descriptions but not for theory. If you don't find theory important then stick with colours and avoid trying to 'educate' other people about Physics. It really doesn't help them.

I hate to break it to you, but color (even by eye) is routinely used in pretty sensitive analytical chemistry techniques. Color can change a lot over pretty narrow concentration ranges. Theory can be important to tell you why the iodine-starch complex looks blue, but at the end of the day if you're doing a redox titration to figure out the concentration of something you're looking for that blue color to show up.
 
ketoenol said:
I hate to break it to you, but color (even by eye) is routinely used in pretty sensitive analytical chemistry techniques.

I hate to break it to you, but...

sophiecentaur said:
(...) (physicists) (...) Physics (...) Physics (...) Physics (...)
 
ketoenol said:
I hate to break it to you, but color (even by eye) is routinely used in pretty sensitive analytical chemistry techniques. Color can change a lot over pretty narrow concentration ranges. Theory can be important to tell you why the iodine-starch complex looks blue, but at the end of the day if you're doing a redox titration to figure out the concentration of something you're looking for that blue color to show up.
Just what is your point here? Can you show me just one formula in which 'colour' is used in any other study but colour analysis / synthesis? What are you trying to defend?

What number is associated with the blue colour which indicates the presence of starch. I could expect the numbers out of a colorimeter might be used but we're not dealing with Physics in that case.

Of course we all use the terms "Red Shift" and "Blue Shift" in astronomy but could you possibly say how those two observable effects could be used to find the distance or speed of a departing (or approaching) galaxy can be used. Your photons, in this case, tell us nothing more than a perceived colour. ("by eye", as you say).
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: weirdoguy