Light implying consistency between QM and SR

  • Thread starter Thread starter DaTario
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Light Qm Sr
DaTario
Messages
1,092
Reaction score
46
Hi All,

Let me see if I can put my doubt in words appropriately...

Imagine a source of EM radiation, say a laser beam, and suppose you are running against the laser's direction, i.e., photons go to positive x and you to negative x direction, for instance.

From the POV of SR, light does not change its velocity, but there is Doppler effect and the transfer of momentum and energy (from light to you) increases.

From the POV of QM, there is also Doppler effect and Planck's equation E = hv introduces also an increase in the energy and momentum of the photon.

I am considering that there is conservation of number of photons produced by the source in this context.

Do these two effects rest harmonically on the top of the same physicist's desk?


In other words, if photons are to be considered roughly packets of EM radiation, whose number are conserved in going from one reference frame to another, and if its velocity does not change in going from one reference frame to another so it must be that the energy ought to increase with the frequency. Does it make sense?



Best wishes

DaTario
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, it makes sense.
So what is your question?
 
My question is:

Does Relativity in itself imply the increase of energy of radiation with its frequency ?


And perhaps we should go beyond classical Doppler effect. Does relativistic Doppler effect accounts for the correct increase (with the frequency) in the energy of photons (EM packets of radiation) ?
Best wishes

DaTario
 
Last edited:
DaTario said:
My question is:

Does Relativity in itself imply the increase of energy of radiation with its frequency ?

yes, it does


And perhaps we should go beyond classical Doppler effect. Does relativistic Doppler effect accounts for the correct increase (with the frequency) in the energy of photons (EM packets of radiation) ?
Best wishes

DaTario

yes, it does
 
It seems quite strange, for if Relativity could have offered support to Planck's equation, E = hv, Planck, himself, wouldn't have said that his equation was just a hint that was capable to provide an answer to the black body problem. Do you know some reference to this result ?

Thank you in advance,

Best wishes

DaTario
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. The Relativator was sold by (as printed) Atomic Laboratories, Inc. 3086 Claremont Ave, Berkeley 5, California , which seems to be a division of Cenco Instruments (Central Scientific Company)... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/relativator-circular-slide-rule-simulated-with-desmos/ by @robphy
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...

Similar threads

Back
Top