I Trying to Understand the 1928 article by Raman on Nature

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on two key points from C.V. Raman's 1928 article regarding the Raman effect. The first point addresses the distinction between "unmodified" and "modified" scattering, where modified scattering is linked to fluctuations in atomic states, indicating inelastic scattering rather than elastic. The second point clarifies that the "feebleness" of the Raman effect compared to ordinary scattering suggests it is not fluorescence, as fluorescence typically exhibits greater intensity. The conversation emphasizes the role of polarization as empirical evidence supporting Raman's interpretation of modified scattering as an inelastic process. Overall, the participants seek to deepen their understanding of Raman's theoretical framework and its implications.
Salmone
Messages
101
Reaction score
13
I have two doubts about the article Raman published in 1928 on Nature when he discovered Raman effect, precisely about these two sentences he wrote:1.
If we assume that the X-ray scattering of the "unmodified" type observed by Prof. Compton corresponds to the normal or average state of the atoms and molecules, while the "modified" scattering of altered wave-length corresponds to their fluctuations from that state, it would follow that...

What does it mean the modified scattering corresponds to their fluctuations in Compton effect? I think he's talking about the radiation undergoing Compton scattering that is re-emitted at a lower frequency but why does it correspond to fluctuations? What was he talking about?

2. When he proves that the radiation emitted after Raman effect can't be simple fluorescence he says that:

That the effect is a true scattering and not a fluorescence is indicated in the first place by its feebleness in comparison with the ordinary scattering, and secondly...

What did he mean by "its flebleness in comparison with ordinary scattering"? That fluorescence is less or more intense of scattering? Something like this?

The article I'm citing is "A new type of secondary radiation" appeared on Nature-March 31, 1928.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think Raman and Krishnan simply refer to the fact that their "modified scattering" is the inelastic scattering of a photon on an atom or molecule, while the "normal scattering" refers to elastic scattering.
 
vanhees71 said:
I think Raman and Krishnan simply refer to the fact that their "modified scattering" is the inelastic scattering of a photon on an atom or molecule, while the "normal scattering" refers to elastic scattering.
It does make sense, can you help me also with question 2?
 
This one I also haven't understood. I think the main argument is the one about polarization as an empirical proof that their interpretation of their "modified scattering" as an inelastic scattering process is correct.
 

Thread 'The Power of QM and QFT'

We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following; https://www.cambridge.org/engage/api-gateway/coe/assets/orp/resource/item/66a6a6005101a2ffa86cdd48/original/a-derivation-of-maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf 'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s...
View full post »

Similar threads

I Understanding Scattered Radiation in Photon Beams
Replies
8
Views
2K
I Difference between Scattering and Emission of Photons
Replies
25
Views
12K
A Cause of spontaneous emission?
Replies
15
Views
4K
A Is Chapter 5's Approach to the Photoelectric Effect Unique in QFT Literature?
Replies
5
Views
2K
Memorizing C.V. Raman's Effect: Tips & Tricks
Replies
6
Views
3K
I Black Hole Fire Walls, Brick Walls, and the Casimir Effect
Replies
6
Views
2K
I Photon emission, power output (and black holes)
Replies
47
Views
4K
I Differentiated Sakharov Equation for Vacuum Fluctuations
Replies
1
Views
1K
Raman Effect and Fluorescence: Understanding the Differences and Mechanisms
Replies
3
Views
3K
I Radiative and Nonradiative Transitions
Replies
3
Views
4K