How Does the Photoelectric Effect Transition from Wave to Particle Theory?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the photoelectric effect, specifically examining the transition between wave theory and quantum theory in the context of light behavior. Participants explore the implications of intensity, photon distribution, and energy transfer in relation to classical and quantum perspectives.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question how wave theory and quantum theory merge in the equation representing power received by a metal plate, particularly in terms of intensity and photon energy.
  • Others propose that treating light as a wave is a macroscopic representation of many photons, suggesting that the probabilistic distribution of photons can resemble wave behavior.
  • A participant argues that the energy of electromagnetic waves in classical electrodynamics does not depend on frequency, contrasting with quantum theory where photon energy is proportional to frequency.
  • Some participants highlight experimental observations of the photoelectric effect, noting that the kinetic energy of emitted electrons is proportional to the frequency of the radiation and independent of intensity.
  • There is a discussion about the quantization of light, with some asserting that the number of emitted photoelectrons is proportional to the number of incident photons.
  • One participant expresses uncertainty about the implications of duality in light behavior, questioning whether increasing the number of photons would affect the number of emitted photoelectrons.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the reconciliation of wave and particle theories, with no consensus reached on how these concepts interact in the context of the photoelectric effect. Some agree on the quantization of light, while others remain skeptical about the interpretations presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various assumptions about the behavior of light, the definitions of intensity and energy, and the implications of experimental results without resolving these complexities.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and educators in physics, particularly those exploring modern physics concepts related to light, wave-particle duality, and the photoelectric effect.

i_island0
Messages
123
Reaction score
0
This is regarding photoelectric effect.

Suppose a power source (having power P) is at distance r from the metal plate and photons are assumed to strike the plate normally.
Intensity of light reaching the plate is: I = P/4.PI.r^2
If plate area is A, we say power received is: P(R) = I.A = nhv/t ----(1)

Now, my question is how suddenly we merged wave theory and quantum theory in equation (1).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Because treating light like a single wave with an intensity is just a macroscopic representation of a _very_ large number of photons randomly distributed around the source according to their wave functions.
 
peter0302 said:
Because treating light like a single wave with an intensity is just a macroscopic representation of a _very_ large number of photons randomly distributed around the source according to their wave functions.

can u explain in more detail please
 
i never read anywhere that wave distribution represents photons
 
The probabilistic distribution of the photons (which are particles) around a point light source is going to represent a wave eminating from a source. Photons are governed by wave functions and the Schrödinger Equation just like all particles. Therefore, like a wave, intensity will decrease with the square of the distance.
 
i_island0 said:
This is regarding photoelectric effect.

Suppose a power source (having power P) is at distance r from the metal plate and photons are assumed to strike the plate normally.
Intensity of light reaching the plate is: I = P/4.PI.r^2
If plate area is A, we say power received is: P(R) = I.A = nhv/t ----(1)

Now, my question is how suddenly we merged wave theory and quantum theory in equation (1).


'Quantum theory' is in hv----the energy of a photon is proportional to the frequency. That is completely in conflict with classical eletromagnetism, or electrodynamics, where the energy of the electromagnetic wave does not depend on frequency.
 
That's right, but the question, I thought, was how could a wave concept like intensity be reconciled with the particle concept, and the answer is because a gazillion photons distributed randomly from a point-source look like a wave with intensity proportional to the number of photons divided by r^2.
 
joyer2 said:
'Quantum theory' is in hv----the energy of a photon is proportional to the frequency. That is completely in conflict with classical eletromagnetism, or electrodynamics, where the energy of the electromagnetic wave does not depend on frequency.

But look at the experimental results of the photo-electric effect :

1) The kinetic energy of the electrons is proportional to he frequency of the EM radiation
2) The kinetic energy of the electrons is independent of the total energy of the EM radiation (ie the intensity).

It's the second observation that should answer your question !

marlon
 
marlon said:
But look at the experimental results of the photo-electric effect :

1) The kinetic energy of the electrons is proportional to he frequency of the EM radiation
2) The kinetic energy of the electrons is independent of the total energy of the EM radiation (ie the intensity).

It's the second observation that should answer your question !

marlon

1) tells you the light is quantized---Ek~hv, the kinetic energy of an electron is transferred from one 'light particle'.
2) tells you the light is quantized---the number of photoelectrons N_pe is proportional to the intensity which is the number of photons N_p, i.e, N_pe = N_p, one photon knocks one electron out.
 
  • #10
What exactly is the question here?
 
  • #11
i_island0 said:
i never read anywhere that wave distribution represents photons

At what level are you studying? In the USA, most university physics students see this in their second-year "introductory modern physics" course and textbook.
 
  • #12
I am a mentor myself. Hopefully will become a good one soon.
 
  • #13
joyer2 said:
1) tells you the light is quantized---Ek~hv, the kinetic energy of an electron is transferred from one 'light particle'.
2) tells you the light is quantized---the number of photoelectrons N_pe is proportional to the intensity which is the number of photons N_p, i.e, N_pe = N_p, one photon knocks one electron out.

OOPS, my post was adressed to I_Island, i should have quoted him.

LOL,

I_Island, the above two questions illustrate how the transistion from "wave to particle" is made and explained.

marlon
 
  • #14
Quote:
Originally Posted by joyer2 View Post
1) tells you the light is quantized---Ek~hv, the kinetic energy of an electron is transferred from one 'light particle'.
2) tells you the light is quantized---the number of photoelectrons N_pe is proportional to the intensity which is the number of photons N_p, i.e, N_pe = N_p, one photon knocks one electron out.
OOPS, my post was adressed to I_Island, i should have quoted him.

LOL,

I_Island, the above two questions illustrate how the transistion from "wave to particle" is made and explained.

marlon
Does one photon have energy=hv so n photons have energy nhv?
Isn't this another way of explaining the discrete energy levels Planck used to explain the BB radiation. I take it this means that a particle can only act on one other particle and that one photon can't influence two electrons.

This would mean that if we increase n the quantity of photons and intensity then it won't result in an increase in the photoelectrons emitted as long as there are enough photons n to satisfy all the electrons availiable for release?

Im not sure I like the idea of having duality :(

Alex
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
6K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K