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

The nature of electric magnetic radiation,it's rest mass and potential to sl

  1. Oct 12, 2003 #1
    [SOLVED] the nature of electric magnetic radiation,it's rest mass and potential to sl

    Some people look at light as photons I look at
    light simular to radio waves except at a higher
    frequency,so if you analyse light from the point
    of from radio waves you get a much better
    picture as to whats going on.If you have wire
    carrying DC current it has a magnetic field
    around it,since this field is something it must
    have mass although extremely small.When an AC
    current is fluctuated at a low frequecy in an
    antenna this magnetic field collaspes around the
    the antenna, as the frequency increases the speed
    at which the field expands and contracts
    increases. At certian frequency the waves
    propagate where the veloctity of the expanding
    magnetic field is c and the contractive force
    of the magnetic field is overcome. Since magnetic
    fields have mass and light is made up of
    magnetic fields,then light must have rest mass.
    Therefore at c light waves have a value of
    mass and can therfore be slowed down. Light
    from a distant star can be slowed down by the
    contractive force of the magnetic portion of light
    acting on the expanding electromagnetic radiation
    after it's covered vast distances. This should
    show up as red shifting of a distant star.

    Replying to the comment does a magnetic field have
    mass, I assumed that since a magnetic exists it
    would follow that it would have mass. The proof
    that I can offer you is this, if you take a
    superconducting air core toriodal inductor and charge it with a powerful magnetic field,then
    energy x will have gone into the toriod,since no energy was dissipated in the toriod windings,the
    energy must be stored in the toriod.Relying on
    energy mass equivalency the toriod with the
    magnetic field is going to have more mass than
    the one without the field.So therefore it is safe
    to assume that a magnetic field has mass.

    Further correction, could it be possible that
    a magnetic field is stored potential energy and
    has no mass? I think it's time that science
    investigates this situation, it will answer a
    lot of questions.
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 13, 2003
  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 12, 2003 #2


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Uh yeah. Theory development, here you come!

    - Warren
  4. Oct 12, 2003 #3


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    It is not clear where you came to the conclusion that the magnetic field has a mass.
  5. Oct 12, 2003 #4
    waving goodbye to particles

    okay... let's start from the top here, shall we?
    first of all, it is true that at lower frequencies, light behaves more like a wave, and at higher frequencies, it behaves like a particle. judging from this, it looks as though light switches modalities around the visible range.
    now, since light obviously DOESN'T do this, we're left wondering why it looks this way. the nature of light leaves us thinking then that we are dealing with distinct quanta phasing in and out of matter/energy forms, and the faster that phasing occurs, the more it looks like a particle. the slower the phasing occurs, the more it looks like a wave. also, consider the debroglie wavelength of a photon. it's DARN small!

    just wondering... what do you mean by "magnetic field collapse"?
  6. Oct 13, 2003 #5
    once again, the rookie tries to make a point.

    well, in the case of an antenna, it's usually a sine wave making that collapse by approaching the zero amplitude line. this means that collapse is symptomatic of a bilateral decay of the field, and is therefore merely the ground state of sinusoidal oscillation. this seems to fit with the fact that photons are all mass and no energy at that point in time, and therefore have zero on the energy output amplitude. when the waveform has maxima or minima, however, then you would have the complete energy form of the quanta.
  7. Oct 13, 2003 #6


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    You are tip toeing around the definitions of mass. Really all you are saying is that the field has energy. Do not equate energy equivlence to rest mass.

    There are very knowledgeable people here who argue the existance of RF photons. Can you prove they do not exist or are you just assumining they do not exist?
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2003
  8. Oct 13, 2003 #7
    who says period of membership proves knowledgability? ;-)

    well, i was assuming that photons exist for all wavelengths, however, that depends on whether you're saying "photons" as particles, or "photons" as quanta with no discrete state to determine whether they really are matter, energy, or both.
  9. Oct 13, 2003 #8
    The particle or wave properties of electromagnetic waves

    RF or light paricles do not exist.Electromagnetic
    waves remain electromagnetic waves at all
    frequencies.Starting at the AM band electromagnetic
    waves exhibit pure wave properties
    and bend around corners as the frequency increases
    the wave properties give over to particle properties
    the pariticle properties are due to the
    pinch off factor,where the wave pinches off when
    encoutering a sharp edge,the factor increases as the
    wavelength decreases.Microwaves which are
    line of sight exhibit mostly particle properties.
    X-rays which exhibit pure particle properties pinch
    off on the nucleus and therefore produce perfect
    X-ray images.
  10. Oct 13, 2003 #9


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    To me all this says is that they haven't figured out a good experiment to exhibit the RF particle properties. It's silly to say that quanta don't exist, since they are part of the one theory of electromagnetic radiation that covers all of the spectrum. It's just that they aren't observed. The fact that RF radiation in its wave nature exhibits all the phenomena of wave-nature is no surprise, X-rays do too if sufficiantly encouraged.

    Notice that the Lamb shift, the defining experiment for QED, was done with microwaves, far longer than visual waves. And that effect is always calculated with photons. Superaccurately too.
  11. Oct 13, 2003 #10


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    2 slit experiment?

    What is the longest wavelength EM radiation which has been used to show particle behaviour?

    IIRC, TES and superconducting tunnel junction detectors can both detect single photons of up to ~0.1mm wavelength.
  12. Oct 13, 2003 #11
    I stand corrected

    Individual packets of light or photons make perfect sense if you look at then as a short
    burst of electromagnetic radition emitted when an
    electron of an atom changes orbital,but to say that there
    made up of something other than electric and
    magnetic fields is false,to say that there
    rest mass is different from RF radiation rest mass is false. Also I don't buy into the fact that
    photons would exist for AM band RF radiation.
  13. Oct 13, 2003 #12
    well, i still don't get part of it...

    so, is that right, then, about the nodes of the waves possibly being the points where matter-like interactions would be seen the most, etc?
  14. Oct 14, 2003 #13


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    What specific observational/experimental data can you point to which leads you to conclude that AM RF is different from the rest of the EM spectrum, from TeV gammas to ELF radio?
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook