Intuition for Rayleigh Scattering

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the intuition behind the factor of ##a^{6}## in the Rayleigh Scattering formula, particularly in relation to particle diameter and its implications in scattering phenomena. Participants explore theoretical justifications, derivations, and the relationship between particle size and scattering intensity.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the intuitive justification for the factor of ##a^{6}## in the Rayleigh Scattering formula, suggesting a possible link to dipole moments.
  • Another participant proposes that the factor may relate to the square of the volume, prompting further exploration of the concept.
  • A third participant references a paper that explains the size dependence of Rayleigh scattering based on the number of scatterers and their volume, indicating that the scattering cross section is proportional to the square of the number of scatterers.
  • One participant acknowledges the intuitive sense of a volume squared factor but questions the analogy of photon volume in relation to scatterers, while also mentioning a derivation involving the polarization of a sphere and the dipole moment leading to the ##a^{6}## factor.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying degrees of agreement on the intuitive aspects of the ##a^{6}## factor, but there is no consensus on the specific reasoning or derivations that justify it. Multiple competing views and interpretations remain present in the discussion.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes references to various theoretical frameworks and derivations, but lacks a unified approach or resolution regarding the underlying principles of the ##a^{6}## factor in Rayleigh Scattering.

bananabandana
Messages
112
Reaction score
5
Is there some way to - from an intuition standpoint - justify the fact that there should be a factor of ##a^{6}##, (where ##a ## is the particle diameter) in the Rayleigh Scattering formula? I've seen a few sources hint that there should be. I can follow the derivation from e.g a Lorentz atom, but I don't see why I should immediately be thinking of the factor of ##a^{6}##? [Is it somehow related to a dipole moment?]

Rayleigh Scattering Formula:

$$ I \propto I_{0} \lambda^{-4} a^{6} $$
 
Science news on Phys.org
Square of volume?
 
Your question got me interested to look around a bit. I found the following paper, Particle Optics in the Rayleigh Regime: http://patarnott.com/pdf/Moosmuller2009JAWMA.pdf

It's more than I wanted to read right now, and I'm not sure it meets your requirement of being intuitive, but on page 1029 they state:

Thus the r6 (for spherical particles) or more general V2 size dependence of Rayleigh particle scattering has been obtained from two simple facts: (1) the scattering cross section is proportional to the number of identical scatterers squared (i.e., n2); and (2) the number of scatterers (or molecules) in a particle is proportional to its volume, or to its radius cubed for a spherical particle.
 
Thanks! Sorry for the slow reply - I've been away from a connection for a while. I guess as Bystander says it does make intuitive sense that you should have a factor of volume squared for scattering of two particles. But in that case why should the photon be seen as having the same volume as the scatterer? (as much as it makes sense for a photon to have a volume...) I think the second argument is convincing. Though I've also seen another derivation now in terms of the polarization of a sphere - where the scattering intensity is proportional to the square of the amplitude reflected field, the reflected field depends on the instantaneous dipole moment, and so we get ## a^{6}## again - I can no longer find it, which is a pain, and that's all I remember - but perhaps you can get something out of that?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K