Not necessarily -- it's just a function of [itex]\lambda[/itex]. The size of a photon is not known and is a tricky theoretical concept. As a particle, it is a zero-dimensional point. But it has a wavefunction, and this gives it a sense of spatial extent. A photon is a quantum of energy of the electromagnetic force. It is not correct to think of the photon as any more general than that. Of course, in most problems of interest in introductory physics (electrons jumping energy levels and emitting quanta) the electromagnetic force is the main player.Pierre007080 said:Thanks for that definition ... more or less is OK for me. The fact that we are dividing by the wavelength makes this quantum of energy by definition always one wavelength long. Is that correct?
I would need to know more details about what you are trying to do. What do you mean by primordial particles? What are their properties (mass, charge, spin, etc)? Are these particles free or are they interacting with each other? If they are interacting, are you considering them as occurring in bound states?Pierre007080 said:Hi Bapowell,
Thanks for the response. My dilemma is that I am trying to get my head around the type of emission one could expect from primordial particles. Being so small, their would their ability to absorb and then emit more than one quantum at a time be limited or could you expect a continuous wave from such a small thing?
It depends on lots of things. The fact that dark matter is 'dark' is a result of the fact that it is electromagnetically neutral -- it emits and reflects no light. Therefore, dark matter particles should not be emitting any photons whatsoever. If they did, they would have spectral properties that could be observed. As a side note, the CMB was generated 13 billion years ago approximately instantaneously. It is a near perfect blackbody with a temperature of around 2.7 Kelvin and is exceptionally uniform to 1 part in 100.000. Dark matter is clumpy as a result of its gravitation (similarly to ordinary matter) and so even if it did somehow manage to emit radiation, it would be exceedingly difficult to generate such a smooth and pristine radiation field as the CMB.Pierre007080 said:Hi Derek. Yes, this is my homework. I am 58 years old and am trying to do some original thinking with regards to dark matter. In my hypothesis I see dark matter as primordial particles being formed continuously. I am trying to ascertain the type of emission that such dark matter would produce. Is it single photons being emitted or is it a continuous wave. Would it be in the microwave region? Is it maybe CMB?
If they are non-interacting, then by this very definition they cannot emit photons.Pierre007080 said:Hi Bapowell,
I am concerned this debate may take us outside the rules that this forum allows with regards to alternative views from the standard model. It is for this reason that I am trying to keep my questions as basic as possible. NOTHING in the universe is at or below 0 degrees K and as such MUST emit. Perhaps we should keep the debate along the lines of my question: would such (theoretical) non-interacting particles weighing 500 000 to 8 000 000 eV emit photon by photon or a continuous wave?
Pierre007080 said:Hi Guys, surely the emission frequency cannot depend upon th SIZE of the particle?
bapowell said:If they are non-interacting, then by this very definition they cannot emit photons.
Deric Boyle said:may I take it as an 'okay' .Sir?
PhilDSP said:Not necessarily the size of the particle, but rather the area in which the energy is bound or modulating. For visible light, it is the ratios of the before and after electron orbitals about the atom or molecule that determine the photon frequency. (Before and after radiation occurs that is)
But if they are emitting EM radiation then they are electrostatically charged. If I place two of your dark matter particles of opposite charges next to each other...will they not stick together?Pierre007080 said:When I say non-interacting, I mean in the sense of the particle binding with other particles. Any EM radiation would either destroy such small particles or be absorbed. If the energy were absorbed these tiny particles would probably emit the energy pretty promptly. It is this emission that I refer to. Single photon?
Pierre007080 said:Hi PhilDSP,
Perhaps you are referring to atoms with orbitals. These subatomic particles have weights that are on the same scale as a gamma ray photon. Is it possible that they could emit photons nearly their own weight?
The relationship between quantum, photon, and wavelength is described by the wave-particle duality principle in quantum mechanics. A photon, which is a discrete packet of energy, can behave as both a particle and a wave. Its wavelength is inversely proportional to its energy, as described by the equation E = hc/λ, where E is energy, h is Planck's constant, c is the speed of light, and λ is the wavelength.
The wavelength of a photon determines its energy and, therefore, its behavior. Photons with longer wavelengths have lower energies and behave more like waves, while photons with shorter wavelengths have higher energies and behave more like particles.
Yes, the wavelength of a photon can be measured using various techniques such as diffraction, interference, or spectroscopy. These methods involve passing the photon through a diffraction grating or a prism, which separates the different wavelengths of light, allowing for measurement.
The wavelength and frequency of a photon are inversely proportional, as described by the equation c = λf, where c is the speed of light, λ is the wavelength, and f is the frequency. This means that as the wavelength increases, the frequency decreases, and vice versa.
The relationship between quantum, photon, and wavelength is essential in understanding the behavior of light and other electromagnetic radiation. It also plays a crucial role in various fields such as quantum mechanics, optics, and telecommunications. This relationship allows us to measure and manipulate light in various ways, leading to numerous technological advancements.