Why aren't molecular vibrations synchronized in a way that can be observed?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Molecular vibrations do not synchronize in a macroscopically observable manner due to the inherent nature of energy level populations and the absence of conditions necessary for collective excitations. While phenomena like stimulated emission in MASERs and LASERs demonstrate synchronization under specific conditions, such occurrences are not typical in molecular vibrations. The discussion highlights that normal modes of vibrations exist in solids, but these do not translate to observable synchronization at the molecular level due to thermal activity and the lack of friction among individual atoms.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of molecular vibrations and energy levels
  • Familiarity with stimulated emission concepts
  • Knowledge of collective excitations in solid-state physics
  • Basic principles of thermodynamics and thermal activity
NEXT STEPS
  • Research "collective excitations in solids" for deeper insights into molecular behavior
  • Explore "stimulated emission" and its applications in MASER and LASER technology
  • Investigate "normal modes of vibrations" and their significance in solid-state physics
  • Study "thermal activity effects on molecular dynamics" to understand temperature influences
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, chemists, and materials scientists interested in molecular dynamics, energy level interactions, and the principles of synchronization in physical systems.

limitkiller
Messages
80
Reaction score
0
why are molecular vibrations never synchronized in a way that would make them macroscopically observable?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why would you expect them to synchronize?

MRI has a process to synchronize some fraction of nuclear spins - enough to pick up a signal with a conventional antenna.
 
limitkiller said:
why are molecular vibrations never synchronized in a way that would make them macroscopically observable?

Isn't this the same question as "Why don't all the waves in the ocean synchronize to make one big wave?"

As @mfb said, "Why would you expect them to synchronize?"
 
limitkiller said:
why are molecular vibrations never synchronized in a way that would make them macroscopically observable?
The earliest practical examples of Stimulated Emission was with Microwaves. The MASER came before the LASER and in both cases, waves are produced in synchronism. You do need 'special' conditions for this to happen and it would never happen by chance because of the way the energy levels are naturally populated. It would be interesting to know the lowest frequency of stimulated emission that has been achieved. Probably something to do with thermal activity upsetting the population?
I did a search and found this PF link which suggests there is no actual lower limit. It's not done because it's much easier to produce a non-quantum based process (a common or garden electronic oscillator) for producing coherent RF waves.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: limitkiller
limitkiller said:
why are molecular vibrations never synchronized in a way that would make them macroscopically observable?
That's not true. E. g., sound waves in solids are synchronised vibrations of the molecules. The term to look for is "collective excitations".
 
limitkiller said:
why are molecular vibrations never synchronized in a way that would make them macroscopically observable?

What makes you think that they are not "synchronized"?

There are "normal modes" of vibrations in solids. And DrDu has pointed out another example.

Your starting premise is faulty. Rather than asking us to explain your faulty starting premise, it is wise to FIRST establish if that premise is true or false.

Zz.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: limitkiller and Bystander
mfb said:
Why would you expect them to synchronize?
If we had two magnets swinging on pendulums, I would expect them to synchronize after a while(Right?).

ZapperZ said:
What makes you think that they are not "synchronized"?

There are "normal modes" of vibrations in solids. And DrDu has pointed out another example.

Your starting premise is faulty. Rather than asking us to explain your faulty starting premise, it is wise to FIRST establish if that premise is true or false.
you are right. I was thinking about the vibrations that are due too temperature.
 
sophiecentaur said:
and it would never happen by chance because of the way the energy levels are naturally populated.
How so?
 
limitkiller said:
How so?
It's a while since I learned about stimulated emission but is it not true to say that a population inversion (necessary for lasing) is not a common natural occurrence?
 
  • #10
limitkiller said:
If we had two magnets swinging on pendulums, I would expect them to synchronize after a while(Right?).
Based on friction macroscopic objects have. There is no friction on the level of individual atoms because you can't heat their constituents.
 
  • #11
mfb said:
Based on friction macroscopic objects have. There is no friction on the level of individual atoms because you can't heat their constituents.
Assuming that there was no friction, wouldn't two magnets swinging freely parallel to each other eventually synchronize?
 
  • #12
No.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: limitkiller
  • #13
Search Youtube for "Metronome Synchronization" , keep in mind they share a "floating" platform...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 156 ·
6
Replies
156
Views
11K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K