How long does it take an electric dipole to emit a photon?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the time it takes for an electric dipole to emit a photon, particularly in the context of quantum physics. Participants explore the relationship between oscillation frequency, radiant power, and photon emission time, incorporating both theoretical and practical considerations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that the time for an electric dipole to emit a photon can be expressed as Δt = ħω / P(ω), where P(ω) is the radiant power derived from quantum physics.
  • Another participant suggests that the probability of photon emission is related to the fine-structure constant, indicating its importance in calculations.
  • Concerns are raised about the calculated time Δt being large, with one participant estimating it to be approximately 492 seconds for certain frequencies, questioning whether this duration is reasonable.
  • Some participants argue that the calculations should yield a smaller Δt if done correctly, prompting a discussion about the constants used in the calculations.
  • There is a mention of the need for additional parameters in the expression for P(ω) to account for different dipole emitters with varying emission powers.
  • One participant notes that cellphones do not operate based on atomic emission, but rather through antennas, and provides a typical emission time for atoms as about 10^-8 seconds.
  • Another participant discusses the implications of using the Bohr radius and suggests considering the hydrogen spectrum for a more accurate context.
  • Further calculations are presented, indicating that a higher frequency would result in a significantly shorter emission time, challenging the earlier estimates.
  • A later reply critiques the reliance on the Bohr radius for calculations, suggesting that classical electromagnetic fields interacting with electrons may provide a clearer understanding of the emission process.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the calculated time for photon emission, with some asserting that it is excessively long while others argue it should be shorter. There is no consensus on the accuracy of the calculations or the relevance of the parameters used.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight potential limitations in the calculations, including the dependence on specific constants and assumptions about the dipole model. The discussion also touches on the historical context of quantum mechanics and its implications for understanding photon emission.

blenx
Messages
30
Reaction score
0
Suppose there is an electic dipole that starts to oscillate with frequency ω at t=0, then how long does it take the electric dipole to emit a photon?

We know that the radiant power of such electric dipole calculated from quantum physics is [tex]P\left( \omega \right) = \frac{{{\omega ^4}}}{{3\pi {\varepsilon _0}{c^3}}}{\left| {\left\langle {f\left| {{\boldsymbol{\hat d}}} \right|i} \right\rangle } \right|^2}[/tex]. Does it mean that the time it take the electic dipole to emit a photon is [tex]\Delta t = \frac{{\hbar \omega }}{{P\left( \omega \right)}}[/tex]?([tex]{\boldsymbol{\hat d}}[/tex] is the dipole operator.)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Does somebody know the answer?
 
The probability of a photon emission from a single electron is related to the alpha constant, so I think you would have to have that constant somewhere in your calculation in order for it to be accurate. But honestly, that's just a hunch.
 
ThePhysicsGuy said:
The probability of a photon emission from a single electron is related to the alpha constant, so I think you would have to have that constant somewhere in your calculation in order for it to be accurate. But honestly, that's just a hunch.

Because [tex]{\boldsymbol{\hat d}} = e{\boldsymbol{\hat x}}[/tex], the expression of the radiant power actually has contained the alpha constant. What confuse me very much is that if you evaluate the Δt, you will find it quite large, which means that we have to wait for a very long time before the dipole emit a photon.
 
What do you consider large? If you do the calculations correctly, it should be pretty small. Make sure you are plugging in the right constants.
 
ThePhysicsGuy said:
What do you consider large? If you do the calculations correctly, it should be pretty small. Make sure you are plugging in the right constants.

[tex]\Delta t = \frac{{3\pi {\varepsilon _0}\hbar {c^3}}}{{{\omega ^3}{{\left| {\left\langle {f\left| {{\boldsymbol{\hat d}}} \right|i} \right\rangle } \right|}^2}}} \approx \frac{{3\pi {\varepsilon _0}\hbar {c^3}}}{{{\omega ^3}{e^2}{a^2}}} = \frac{{3{c^2}}}{{4\alpha {\omega ^3}{a^2}}}= \frac{{3{c^2}}}{{32\alpha {\pi ^3}{\nu ^3}{a^2}}}\approx \frac{{1.33 \times {{10}^{37}}}}{{{\nu ^3}}}[/tex]
where a is the Bohr radius, alpha is the fine-structure constant, ν is the frequency.

The frequency of the microwave is 300MHz~300GHz. Substitute it into the expression of the Δt, we immediately obtain Δt≈492s~4.92×(10^11)s, which means that if I call you with my cellphone, you will have to wait for Δt before you hear my voice.

Don't you think it a little long?
 
What is the result of the integral of P(w) in w? What does it mean? I miss in this expression for P(w) some parameter that allows one to produce two dipole emiters with two different emission powers.

Maybe it contributes to the clearification of this issue.

Best regards

DaTario
 
cellphones don't work by means of atomic emission.
they use antennas

I've always heard that an atom takes about 10^-8 sec to emit one photon of energy.

since you are using the bohr radius why don't you use a photon in the spectrum of hydrogen
 
granpa said:
cellphones don't work by means of atomic emission.
they use antennas

I've always heard that an atom takes about 10^-8 sec to emit one photon of energy.

since you are using the bohr radius why don't you use a photon in the spectrum of hydrogen

Thanks for your reminding. The data I used in the previous post may be improper.
 
  • #10
hydrogen spectrum starts at about 1000 angstroms.
there are 3*10^18 angstroms in a light sec
 
  • #11
that gives a frequency of 3*10^15
your highest frequency was 3*10^11

a frequency 10^4 times larger should take 10^12 times less time

500 seconds/10^12= 5*10^-10 seconds
 
  • #12
I don't have it on me right now, but I think M. Fox treats this specifically in his book "Quantum Optics" by Oxford Master Series in Physics. You should check.
 
  • #13
blenx said:
[tex]\Delta t = \frac{{3\pi {\varepsilon _0}\hbar {c^3}}}{{{\omega ^3}{{\left| {\left\langle {f\left| {{\boldsymbol{\hat d}}} \right|i} \right\rangle } \right|}^2}}} \approx \frac{{3\pi {\varepsilon _0}\hbar {c^3}}}{{{\omega ^3}{e^2}{a^2}}} = \frac{{3{c^2}}}{{4\alpha {\omega ^3}{a^2}}}= \frac{{3{c^2}}}{{32\alpha {\pi ^3}{\nu ^3}{a^2}}}\approx \frac{{1.33 \times {{10}^{37}}}}{{{\nu ^3}}}[/tex]
where a is the Bohr radius, alpha is the fine-structure constant, ν is the frequency.

The frequency of the microwave is 300MHz~300GHz. Substitute it into the expression of the Δt, we immediately obtain Δt≈492s~4.92×(10^11)s, which means that if I call you with my cellphone, you will have to wait for Δt before you hear my voice.

Don't you think it a little long?

The actual flux area for an active antenna (an oscilator in sync with incident EM wave, e.g. an atom or cellphone antenna) is determined by the square of the incident EM wavelength, not by the square of Bohr radius. Consequently the photoelectric effect can be fully explained via plain classical EM fields interacting with the electron matter/Dirac field (also via an Schrödinger atom, in dipole approximation). Check the intro section of reference [1] in an https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=71297"for literature on this problem. More thorough quantum optics textbooks (such as L. Mandel, E. Wolf "Optical Coherence and Quantum Optics" Cambridge Univ. Press., Cambridge, 1995) also cover such derivation in detail.

A simple physical picture of how such accumulation works is to consider an active dipole which is oscillating in sync with the incident EM wave. The field generated by the dipole is then suporposed with the incident EM field and the resulting Poynting vector is "bent" toward the dipole (a la funnel), energy-momentum being funneled into the dipole from a much wider cross-section area (~ square of the wavelength) than the area of the dipole itself. Any EE textbooks on antennas should cover this type of derivation for the effect (the amplified rates of energy absorption). That's for example how a tiny AM radio with an antenna of just few centimeters in length can receive broadcast at wavelengths in tens or hundreds of meters (its Poynting vector 'collection funnel' is hundreds of meters wide).

Note that the derivations based on Bohr (dipole) radius you suggest (which are typically found in "pedagogical"/handwaving expositions seeking to motivate introduction of photons) belong historically to pre-Schrödinger/Dirac equation QM, the so-called "Old QM'.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
4K