I QED question: Photons absorbed and emitted by electrons

  • Thread starter dsaun777
  • Start date
111
10
According to QED photons can be absorbed or emitted by electrons, and this process results in em forces via virtual photons. What determines the emitted photon frequency, and are they fully absorbed by electrons assuming photons are discrete and must be in quantized packets? How fast are photons absorbed, instantaneously because all the energy must be transferred? How fast are they emitted? Meaning is there a delta t measuring the energy/time process.
 
452
250
and this process results in em forces via virtual photons.
If you are asking in the context of virtual photons, then this article is a good start:
 
111
10
If you are asking in the context of virtual photons, then this article is a good start:
Putting virtual photons aside for now what about real photons being absorbed and their time.
 
33,482
9,212
It is in general not meaningful to talk about a time for that process.
 
111
10
It is in general not meaningful to talk about a time for that process.
So it is unknown....
 
452
250
"Not meaningfull" is something different than "unknown". For example, where is the 'north' direction on the north pole? Do you think it's meaningfull to talk about that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: mfb
111
10
"Not meaningfull" is something different than "unknown". For example, where is the 'north' direction on the north pole? Do you think it's meaningfull to talk about that?
Yes, if it is meaningless then surely it must have meaning as to why its meaningless.
 
111
10
I would say it's contradictio in adiecto.
Maybe time is not the right word but electrons do interact with photons and I'm interested in these dynamics.
 
33,482
9,212
Then you'll have to learn a lot of quantum field theory.
 

vanhees71

Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
13,501
5,407
"Not meaningfull" is something different than "unknown". For example, where is the 'north' direction on the north pole? Do you think it's meaningfull to talk about that?
Interesting question ;-)). I'd say it's perpendicular up!
 

vanhees71

Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
13,501
5,407
Maybe time is not the right word but electrons do interact with photons and I'm interested in these dynamics.
As @mfb is saying, then you have to learn QFT (it's fun and addictive ;-)). To answer the question qualitatively: It is impossible to intepret the QFT dynamics in terms of particles during the "interaction process". That's why what's usually calculated with QFT are socalled S-matrix elements, describing the probalities that in a scattering process a given "asymptotic free incoming state" (for technical reasons usually two particles like the two protons colliding in the LHC, far away from each other so that you can assume them to be non-interacting) goes into a given other "asymptotic free outgoing state", i.e., some particles that are far enough from each other so that you can consider them as non-interacting.

For times "at the scattering process", i.e., when the incoming and procuced particles are close to each other it is not clear, how to intepret the field dynamics in terms of particles at all, i.e., it's even a bit schizophrenic to formulate the first half of this sentence ;-))).
 
111
10
Then you'll have to learn a lot of quantum field theory.
QFT or QED? I want to know photon electron interactions nothing else for now.
 
452
250
Well, one usually starts learning QFT from QED so o0) Anyway, if you really want to delve smoothly into technicalities I recommend Klaubers Student Friendly Quantum Field Theory. It focuses on QED only, most of the derivations are outlined in great details and Klauber devotes one whole chapter to show that pop-sci myth about virtual particles (or whatever) popping in and out of existence has no basis in QFT.

 
111
10
Well, one usually starts learning QFT from QED so o0) Anyway, if you really want to delve smoothly into technicalities I recommend Klaubers Student Friendly Quantum Field Theory. It focuses on QED only, most of the derivations are outlined in great details and Klauber devotes one whole chapter to show that pop-sci myth about virtual particles (or whatever) popping in and out of existence has no basis in QFT.
How well does nutshell cover qed and qft in comparison?
 
452
250
Well, I paused for a while after reading the first chapter (I want to finish his group theory book first), but some people say (well, @vanhees71 says :oldbiggrin:) that Zee tried to fit too much in his nutshell and it didn't end up well. It may be a good read, but after you know something on the subject, so that you won't be distracted by some things that didn't end up well didactically.
 
33,482
9,212
QED is the easiest QFT that describes an interaction in our world.
 

vanhees71

Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
13,501
5,407
How well does nutshell cover qed and qft in comparison?
You mean Zee's book? It's funny to read if you know QFT already. I've no clue, how one can understand it if you don't already know it from this book. It's too brief and partly superficial. My favorite intro book is

M. D. Schwartz, Quantum field theory and the Standard
Model, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York
(2014).
 
111
10
You mean Zee's book? It's funny to read if you know QFT already. I've no clue, how one can understand it if you don't already know it from this book. It's too brief and partly superficial. My favorite intro book is

M. D. Schwartz, Quantum field theory and the Standard
Model, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York
(2014).
Why Schwartz? Is he a relative or something😁. I have a friend that is sending me Kaku's quantum field theory a modern introduction, any thoughts on that?
 

vanhees71

Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
13,501
5,407
Kaku is good too. I'm not related to Schwartz in any way. It's just that I think it's a very good QFT book at the introductory level. If you prefer a path-integral-only approach, another one is Bailin, Love, Gauge theories.
 

Related Threads for: QED question: Photons absorbed and emitted by electrons

Replies
4
Views
344
Replies
13
Views
8K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
5K
Replies
7
Views
520
Replies
4
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Top