Light Waves on Macroscopic Scale: Distinguishing from Matter Waves?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the differences between the macroscopic wave characteristics of light and matter waves, exploring the nature of light as both a wave and a particle. It examines the implications of quantum mechanics on the understanding of light and its behavior in various contexts, including interference patterns.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the macroscopic observation of light waves could be an emergence of the probability waves of photons.
  • Others argue that the wavelength of light being in the visible range distinguishes it from matter waves, which are associated with particles that have mass.
  • A participant mentions that the concept of matter waves was largely set aside with Dirac's transformation theory, suggesting a historical perspective on the topic.
  • Another participant expresses that the core physical differences between light waves and matter waves are minimal, complicating the distinction between them.
  • One participant questions whether macroscopic light interference patterns can be understood as quantum probability waves, indicating a need for clarity on the nature of position as an observable for photons.
  • There is a mention that while light's wave-like behavior can be described using quantum mechanics, it is often simplified at the beginner level, leading to potential misunderstandings.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between light waves and matter waves, with no consensus reached on the fundamental distinctions or implications of their similarities. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the interpretation of interference patterns and the nature of light in relation to quantum mechanics.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the definitions of wave behavior and the implications of mass on wave characteristics. The conversation reflects a blend of historical context and contemporary interpretations without resolving the complexities involved.

chris2112
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
scientists have observed light acting as waves on a macroscopic scale before the quantum characteristics of particles were discovered. My question is what sets apart the macroscopic wavelike characteristcs of light apart from other matter waves? This may be a stupid question but can the macroscopic observation of light waves just be an emergence of the probability waves of photons?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Not a stupid question. In a sense: yes. (to the second question: if there's no probability to observe a photon, you son't see it). A bit corny, I concede.
So if you can steer me in another direction, please do.

For the first question, I would say: the fact that the wavelength is in the visible range.

I don't think you should consider light as matter waves: photons have no mass.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba
BvU said:
I don't think you should consider light as matter waves: photons have no mass.

The idea of matter waves was consigned to the dustbin of history when Dirac came up with his transformation theory at the end of 1926 (probably sooner - but certainly by then):
http://www.lajpe.org/may08/09_Carlos_Madrid.pdf

Thanks
Bill
 
Thanks Bill, but it seems to me that is heavy ammunition for Chris. The original question hints at a sense of wonder over the actual difference between light waves and matter waves. And I find it hard to pinpoint that without resorting to indicating rest mass as the only difference: to me that's more a microscopic difference. It doesn't help to say that you can have a kilogram of protons at rest and not a kilogram of photons.

Wave characteristics of matter behaviour popped up long after light was understood in terms of wave behaviour, and it came as a surprise that the core physical differences are virtually none. Conversely, light demonstrates particle behaviour (as in the photoelectric effect) making it even more complicated for a while.

Chris' question is at the very heart of of physics. Not current physics any more, but physics at a very peak in its development over time !
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba
so just to be clear, macroscopic light interference patterns, such as the airy disk or young's double slit, are just the photons quantum probability waves in action?
 
chris2112 said:
scientists have observed light acting as waves on a macroscopic scale before the quantum characteristics of particles were discovered. My question is what sets apart the macroscopic wavelike characteristcs of light apart from other matter waves? This may be a stupid question but can the macroscopic observation of light waves just be an emergence of the probability waves of photons?

Just so you know, we don't have to switch to using the classical wave picture to account for the interference (and other wave-like behavior) of light. We can definitely describe such a feature using quantum mechanical description. The Marcella paper that I've referenced to many times is one such example of this treatment.

So no, this wave-like behavior isn't just a "macroscopic" observation, because it can be described microscopically and all the way up.

Zz.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba
chris2112 said:
so just to be clear, macroscopic light interference patterns, such as the airy disk or young's double slit, are just the photons quantum probability waves in action?

At the beginner level that's the way its usually viewed.

However it isn't true because position is not an observable for photons. Explaining that at the beginner level though isn't easy:
http://arnold-neumaier.at/physfaq/topics/position.html

Unfortunately sometimes in physics its like that - what is taught at the beginner level needs to be unlearned later. Its a royal pain in the toosh for beginners that come here because we don't 'sugar' coat it.

Thanks
Bill
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
13K