Understanding de Broglie formula for massless particles

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the de Broglie formula for massless particles, particularly focusing on the relationship between energy and momentum as expressed by the equation E = pc. Participants explore the implications of this formula for massless particles like photons and question how momentum can be defined without mass.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that for massless particles, the formula simplifies to E = pc, questioning how momentum can be calculated without mass, specifically in the context of photons.
  • Another participant corrects the spelling of "DeBrogle" to "de Broglie" and emphasizes that the formula E = pc is derived from special relativity, not quantum mechanics, and applies to any massless object.
  • This participant explains that while momentum is typically defined as mass times velocity (p = mv), for relativistic particles, it is more useful to express momentum directly, especially for massless particles.
  • A further contribution states that from Planck's quantum hypothesis, the relationship E = hf leads to the expression p = hf/c for massless particles, reinforcing the connection between energy and momentum.
  • There are multiple mentions of the need to correct the spelling of "de Broglie" in the thread title for better searchability.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between momentum and mass, particularly in the context of massless particles. There is no consensus on the definitions and implications of momentum in this scenario, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the clarity of these concepts.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the definitions of momentum and energy in relativistic contexts, as well as the implications of using the term "massless" in relation to particles like photons.

outoftown
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I have taken down in my notes that for massless particles the formula by DeBrogle becomes
E = pc, where p is momentum and c is the speed of light.

But what I don't understand is how you can calculate momentum without mass? I thought momentum was mass times velocity? The specific example I am thinking of is photons. Thanks for the help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Dear OutOfTown,

The first thing you should do is open your notebook. Where it says "DeBrogle", cross that out and write the man's actual name, "de Broglie". What you need to know is that he was French and has a wavelength named after him. Next, in the margin alongside "E = pc" write, "This formula has nothing to do with Louis de Broglie or quantum mechanics. It comes from special relativity and applies to any massless object."

Momentum is an important concept in mechanics. For a slowly moving particle, p = mv, but that is not its definition. Primarily, momentum is the quantity that enters into Newton's second law of motion, and is conserved, meaning that its total value is the same before and after a collision. For a rapidly moving particle, p = γmv, where m is the rest mass and γ = 1/sqrt(1-v2/c2). People who want to insist that p = mv call γm the relativistic mass, but that is more confusing than it is useful. When you're dealing with particles that are relativistic, rather than talk about v = 0.999 c or v = 0.9999 c, it's much easier to give the particle's momentum.

In general, the relationship between energy and momentum is E = sqrt(p2c2 + m2c4). For a particle at rest this reduces to E = mc2, while for a massless particle it reduces to E = pc.
 


It reduces to e = pc.

from Planck's quantum hypothesis, E = hf

so pc = hf and p = hf/c for a massless particle
 


Someone needs to fix the spelling of "de Broglie" in the title of this thread.

Otherwise it will be missed in searches.
..
 


Gordon Watson said:
Someone needs to fix the spelling of "de Broglie" in the title of this thread.

Otherwise it will be missed in searches.
..

Done. Thanks Gordon.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
6K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K