Short wavelengths carry no energy?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the claim that very short wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation, particularly in the ultraviolet range, carry no energy. Participants explore the implications of this statement in the context of black-body radiation and the ultraviolet catastrophe, questioning the relationship between photon energy, wavelength, and the number of photons present at high frequencies.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant quotes Leonard Susskind's assertion that very short wavelengths carry no energy, leading to confusion about whether this refers to gamma rays or wavelengths beyond that.
  • Another participant interprets Susskind's statement as indicating that the probability of finding a photon at very short wavelengths is less than one, suggesting that the energy carried by UV photons is negligible.
  • A different participant points out that according to the Planck-Einstein equation, as wavelength decreases, photon energy increases, raising questions about the validity of the claim that short wavelengths carry no energy.
  • Another response clarifies that while energy per photon increases with decreasing wavelength, the average number of photons decreases more rapidly, leading to a total energy decrease at short wavelengths.
  • One participant relates the discussion to the electromagnetic spectrum of black-body radiation, explaining that at higher frequencies, the expected number of photons falls below one, resulting in negligible energy in those bands.
  • A later post discusses the ultraviolet divergence problem, emphasizing that for the integral over emission quanta to converge, the product of the number of quanta and the energy of each photon must approach zero for short wavelengths.
  • Another participant notes that in the UV limit, the intensity of electromagnetic fields is low relative to the energy of a single photon, with the probability of a single photon being low due to thermal noise considerations.
  • There is a clarification regarding the relationship between energy per photon and wavelength, with one participant correcting their earlier statement about energy trends.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing interpretations of the claim that short wavelengths carry no energy, with some supporting the idea based on statistical mechanics and others challenging it based on the Planck-Einstein relationship. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views present.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference the ultraviolet catastrophe and the behavior of photons at high frequencies, indicating a complex interplay between photon energy and number that is not fully resolved in the discussion.

dlevanchuk
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
short wavelengths carry no energy?

Hey guys (and girls),
I'm reading the book "The Black hole war", by Leonard Susskind and on the page 208 it has written something that kind of surprised me. I ll just quote an entire paragraph:
"The hypothesis that light is composed of indivisible photos whose energy is proportional to their frequency solved the problem (refering to ultraviolet catastrophe). Applying Boltzmann's statistical mechanics to these photons, Eisntein found that the very short wavelengths (high frequency) have less than a single photon. Less that one means none. So the very short wavelengths carry no energy, and the ultraviolet catastropphe ceased to exist."
The part where the author said that high frequency em waves carry no energy gives me a trouble to understand. Was the author referring to the wavelength equal to gamma rays (which I though have extremely high energy) or was the reference made to the wavelengths beyond gamma rays??
 
Physics news on Phys.org


dlevanchuk said:
, Eisntein found that the very short wavelengths (high frequency) have less than a single photon. Less that one means none. So the very short wavelengths carry no energy, and the ultraviolet catastropphe ceased to exist."
Susskind is saying that the probability of finding a photon is less than one, an an insignificant amount of energy is carried away by UV photons, because their probability is nearly exactly zero. So the integral over wavelengths converges as the wavelength limit goes to zero.
 


It is the statement "So the very short wavelengths carry no energy" confuses me.

If use Planck-einstein equation E=hc/lambda, where h is Plancks constant, c is a speed of light and lambda is wavelength, I see that as the wavelength goes smaller - the photon energy goes up.

Am I missing something here? :(
 


As the wavelength decreases, the energy per photon [STRIKE]decreases[/STRIKE] increases, but (in this situation) the (average) number of photons decreases even faster, so the so the total energy decreases with wavelength.
 
Last edited:


This looks like the discussion of EM spectrum of black-body radiation.

If you look at the electromagnetic field inside a black box, you can break down all energy contained into frequency bands. At low frequencies and low energies, there may be lots of photons flying back and forth in a given frequency range. As you look at higher and higher frequencies, the expected number of photons eventually falls below 1.

So, the statement is that there's no energy in short wavelength bands in such a black box, because there are no photons with that frequency there.

For any given photon, the statement E = hc/lambda still holds, of course.
 


Here is a short discussion of the ultra violet (short wavelength) divergence problem.
http://www.statemaster.com/encyclopedia/Ultraviolet-divergence
Convergence required the number of UV photons to go to zero.
[Edit] What is really important is for the integral over all emission quanta to converge for high energy (short wavelength) quanta. So the product of N, the number of quanta in an energy interval dE, and the the energy of each photon E go to zero for short wavelengths: N(E) E dE ==> zero.
 
Last edited:


This means that in the UV limit the EM fields have low intensity with respect to the energy of a single photon. In particular the intensity here is fixed by the thermal noise KT << h v. Thus the Boltzmann law says that the probability of a single photon is low exp(-h v / K T).
 


jtbell said:
As the wavelength decreases, the energy per photon decreases, but (in this situation) the (average) number of photons decreases even faster, so the so the total energy decreases with wavelength.

Just to clarify this did you mean that the energy per photon increases?
 


Dadface said:
Just to clarify this did you mean that the energy per photon increases?

Oops, yes. I'll go back and fix my post. Thanks for pointing it out, even if a bit late. :blushing:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K