I Why can’t photons “pile up” to eject an electron?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter Kostik
  • Start date Start date
Kostik
Messages
274
Reaction score
32
TL;DR Summary
Why doesn’t the bosonic character of photons prevent the photoelectric effect?
The photoelectric effect is essentially the observation that light below a certain frequency cannot ionize an atom, no matter how large its intensity. Einstein explained this in 1905 by postulating that light consists of particles (photons) with energy proportional to their frequency.

However, photons are bosons (spin-1) and therefore any number of photons can occupy the same quantum state. Therefore, in very high intensity light, it seems plausible that two or more photons in the same state can combine their energies to ionize an atom.

Apparently, this is not the case, as the photoelectric effect makes clear. Why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A multi-photon absorption might happen I think under extreme conditions like a strong laser.
 
  • Like
Likes DaveE, Demystifier, gentzen and 1 other person
If you draw the Feynman diagrams for absorption of one and two photons, you see that they have one and two vertices, respectively, so the latter is suppressed because it is a higher order in the perturbative expansion in ##\alpha##.
 
  • Like
Likes Sambuco and bhobba
Multiphoton imaging is a well established tool. Here's a review for GI docs, for example.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3218135/

If you can use this to reach higher excited states I'm sure you could ionize an atom too. But I don't see why you would want to. Just use a shorter wavelength laser, they're cheaper, easier.
 
  • Like
Likes willyengland
I read Hanbury Brown and Twiss's experiment is using one beam but split into two to test their correlation. It said the traditional correlation test were using two beams........ This confused me, sorry. All the correlation tests I learnt such as Stern-Gerlash are using one beam? (Sorry if I am wrong) I was also told traditional interferometers are concerning about amplitude but Hanbury Brown and Twiss were concerning about intensity? Isn't the square of amplitude is the intensity? Please...
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Back
Top