Photoelectric Effect: Why Can't Low Freq Light Excite Electrons?

nothing0
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
a light with frequency 'v' can't excite electrons from a metal surface if the threshold frequency of the metal is greater than the frequency of the wave( the light,electromagnetic radiation)so why don't the energies of the photons add up together and then excite the electron in the surface of the metal (mean even a very intense light with the same frequency can't do it if it has less frequency intense light means lots of photons can't this photons co-operate?)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You got it right. Kinetic energy of emitted electron is function of frequency and not intensity.
For very high intensity of light, it is possible.

You can throw ball up in air only up to certain height. Call your friend to help you and you together can not throw it higher (without using any tool). Friend will be useful to throw heavier ball, but then it is a different attribute.
 
nothing0 said:
a light with frequency 'v' can't excite electrons from a metal surface if the threshold frequency of the metal is greater than the frequency of the wave( the light,electromagnetic radiation)so why don't the energies of the photons add up together and then excite the electron in the surface of the metal (mean even a very intense light with the same frequency can't do it if it has less frequency intense light means lots of photons can't this photons co-operate?)

It is possible. Look up "multiphoton photoemission". This is an important technique in studying the energetics of Rydberg-type states. Note that one must use a light source that has a very high photon density. This is because the excited state has a very short lifetime, and the second photon that comes in must interact with that excited electron before it decays back to the conduction band. The probability of this happening (what we call the "cross-section") is quite low and thus, one must use a light source with a very high photon density per unit area to increase the probability of it happening. For ordinary light sources, this probability is practically zero. That's why the ordinary photoelectric effect is commonly observed.

What this means is that the ordinary photoelectric effect is a single-photon photoemission phenomenon.

BTW, note also that there's another way to cause the emission of a photoelectron even using a light with energy lower than the work function. One can apply an external electric field to the surface, thus lowering the effective work function. This is usually known as the Schottky effect.

Zz.
 
  • Like
Likes Jordan Regan
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top