AlienUFO said:
I know this question maybe like... 'asking the truth that cannot be proven', however, I do like to know if somebody have the answer.
Thanks
<sigh>
OK, I'll tackle this one as well...
Forget about "photons" and E=mc^2 stuff. Let's just look at how we measure "energy" and use just simple, classical wave theory, shall we?
Now, if you look at simple wave theory, you'll see that the "energy" of the wave is related to the amplitude of the wave. Now, let's apply this to something simple such as a mass-spring system. the mass spring system will have more energy if the amplitude of oscillation is larger.
So far, so good.
Now, what if I have two mass-spring system, having the SAME amplitude, but oscillating with different frequencies? For the same of argument, let's have system 1 having frequency f1, while system 2 having frequency f2, where f2 = 2*f1.
Now, even though both are oscillating at the same amplitude, system 2 would have produced TWICE the energy of system 1 within the same time frame. In other words, system two has produced more POWER.
Now go back to one of the things I've asked you to consider, which is on how we measure energy. If you have a photodetector, you often have to specify if you're measuring power, or energy over a
period of time. This means that the detector will open its "window of detection" for a period of time and then shuts it off and spew at you the "energy" that it has received over that period of time. So if you have two "EM waves" coming at you, but one with a higher frequency, then the one with a higher frequency would have made more "oscillations" per second than the one with a lower frequency and thus, deposited more energy within that time frame.
So even without invoking the photon picture, one can easily explain such a thing, and this is where both the wave picture and the photon picture agrees with each other.
Zz.