Radient energy vs nonradient energy

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jsomers
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concepts of radiant energy and non-radiant energy, particularly in the context of Förster resonance energy transfer (FRET) and its underlying physics. Participants explore the definitions and mechanisms of energy transfer relevant to FRET and touch upon related theoretical aspects.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant, Jason, seeks clarification on the difference between radiant energy and non-radiant energy, particularly in relation to FRET.
  • Another participant, Sylas, explains that radiant energy is transferred by photons, while non-radiant energy involves resonance or kinetic energy transfer between atoms.
  • A subsequent post challenges the idea that kinetic mechanisms are involved in FRET, asserting that it is a non-radiant energy transfer through dipole-dipole interactions without photon involvement.
  • This participant further elaborates that FRET relies on the evanescent component of the electromagnetic field, making it sensitive to the distance and orientation of dipoles.
  • Frank introduces a related question about the implications of the Einstein field equations on the nature of gravity and its relationship to radiant energy, suggesting a potential connection to photonic characteristics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the mechanisms of energy transfer in FRET, with some emphasizing the absence of kinetic mechanisms while others discuss the broader implications of energy transfer concepts. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the relationship between gravity and radiant energy as posed by Frank.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the definitions of radiant and non-radiant energy, as well as the assumptions underlying the explanations of FRET and its mechanisms. The connection between gravity and photonic nature remains speculative.

jsomers
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hi People

I am brand new to these forums and brand new to phyics (wells its been about 4 years so its safe to say I have pretty much forgotten everything but the basics)

Anyhow I am just beginning my PhD in Genetics where I will be using Förster resonance energy transfer to investigate the assembly of particular proteins. In my quest to understand the physics behind this phenomenon I came across this diagram:

http://www.olympusmicro.com/primer/techniques/fluorescence/fret/images/fretintrofigure3.jpg

What I don't really understand from it is what is the difference between radiant energy and non-radiant energy.

Forgive me if this is very basic but google has been little help so i thought id ask here.

Thanks for your time.

Jason
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jsomers said:
What I don't really understand from it is what is the difference between radiant energy and non-radiant energy.

Energy transferred by photons (electromagnetic radiation) is a radiant energy transfer.

Energy transferred by resonance, or by kinetic energy going from one atom to another, is non-radiant energy transfer.

Cheers -- sylas
 
Wow that was simple, thanks for the speedy reply!
 
The transfer of energy does not invovle kinetic mechanisms, for FRET.

FRET is a non-radiant form of energy transfer by a dipole-dipole interaction. It's called non-radiant because there is no photon involved in the transfer of energy, only the evanescent (non-propagating) component of the electromagnetic field. This is why FRET experiments are sensitive to both separation distance and relative orientation of the two dipoles.
 
Andy Resnick said:
The transfer of energy does not invovle kinetic mechanisms, for FRET.

FRET is a non-radiant form of energy transfer by a dipole-dipole interaction. It's called non-radiant because there is no photon involved in the transfer of energy, only the evanescent (non-propagating) component of the electromagnetic field. This is why FRET experiments are sensitive to both separation distance and relative orientation of the two dipoles.

Ah. Thanks... and sorry if I lead jsomers up the garden path!
 
Yeah, I have heard there is a fair bit of information you can draw from the occurrence of FRET that's why I am sure i'll be inhabiting these forums for the next three to four years to try to gain a greater understanding of my experiments!
 
No stress sylas, you still provided me the answer to my question about radiant and non radiant. For a genetics crowd it is more then enough info.
 
On a some what similar note: The Einstein field equations couple c and the stress-energy tensor:

R_{\mu \nu} - {1 \over 2}g_{\mu \nu}\,R + g_{\mu \nu} \Lambda = {8 \pi G \over c^4} T_{\mu \nu}

Does this not imply that gravity is a radiating field of a photonic nature? Otherwise why would c be a component?

Frank
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 66 ·
3
Replies
66
Views
13K
Replies
3
Views
3K