Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Questions about lights contradicting properties

  1. Sep 9, 2009 #1
    Hi there, I've got a few questions about light that I'm hoping someone can help me with.

    1. If the properties of energy and mass are interchangeable, then if some particle or wave possesses charge or energy then it must also have mass. Whether a photon is acting as a particle or a wave it still posseses energy, thus mass, and so should not be able to attain a speed of c. I have read an answer to a similar question where the answer stated that possesing mass is not a prequisite to physical existence, but I disagree with that statement, for to exist, a force must possess a physical pressence in the form of an energy in order to cause an affect upon other matter.
    How can you explain this contradiction of light's properties?
    Could it be that the size/mass and properties of the photon are at an exact, compramising point and state required for matter and the speed of c to be able to co exist as one?

    2. What does it mean when an electron is said to move to a higher energy orbit? (Unfortunately I'm not a mathmatition, I'm good with processes, but I need answers in lamens terms). I've read, that, as the atom is energised, eg elctricity in a light bulb etc. the electron becomes temporarily energised, and so moves to a higher energy orbit. Now it cant sustain that orbit, and when it drops back to its preferable, lower energy orbit, that difference in energy is released in the form of a packet of energy; a photon.
    What I want to know, is what is physically happening when the electron becomes energised and moves to a higher energy orbit?
    How is the electron able to possess more energy? for it can't move any faster as it is already aproaching the speed of c anyway. Does the Electron therefore possess a greater charge and increase its size while it is said to move to a higher energy orbit?

    Could it be possible, that as the electron becomes energised, it does infact move at an increased speed, which would cause it to move at, or faster than the speed of c. Perhaps in order to prevent this 'breaking of the rules' The paradox created by it achieving what it should be un able to, is what creates the photon, in order to reset the energys and speeds back down to what they should be. This last point is meerly the entertaining of a fancy of mine. Although there is logic behind this fancy, my post is already too long, and adding this reasoning right now would make it a bit too sizeable.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 9, 2009 #2

    A.T.

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Objects with rest mass cannot reach c. The dynamic mass you mean is just a different word for energy.
    Potential energy is greater for higher orbits.
     
  4. Sep 21, 2009 #3
    How can an object have an energy/mass due to its kinetic energy/acceleration, but not when it is at rest? This makes no sense to me, for if an object exists in physical actuallity, then it must have substance, for if it didn't then it would have no prescence, and thus could not be detected. And if it has substance, even if you refer to it as a 'packet of energy' or what ever, it must have mass or it cannot exist.

    Unfortunately this quote answers nothing. It meerly states common knowledge.
    How is the 'energised electron' able to hold more energy? When it is already approaching the speed of c and so cannot gain any kinetic energy. Does it increase its charge and size? If so, how does it do this? What physically takes place?
    If anyone can give me a more substantial answer, I would really appreciate it, thanks
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2009
  5. Sep 21, 2009 #4

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Please review the forum guidelines regarding personal theories: they aren't allowed here.

    You're wasting your time, anyway, trying to come up with your own theory - most of what you said there is just misunderstandings of what is already known. You'd be much better off buying a used textbook and learning the real science of the issue rather than just idly speculating about it.

    Thread locked.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Questions about lights contradicting properties
Loading...