Why does a photon have a defined frequency but is also somewhat localized?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter QuasarBoy543298
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Frequency Photon
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of photons, specifically addressing the apparent contradiction between their defined frequency and their localization properties. Participants explore concepts from quantum theory, including second quantization, the photoelectric effect, and the implications of photon localization in various experimental contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how photons can have a defined frequency while also being treated as somewhat localized, referencing the photoelectric effect as an example.
  • Another participant asserts that photons cannot be localized due to the absence of a position operator in quantum mechanics.
  • It is noted that while some photon states are eigenstates of the frequency operator, others are not, indicating variability in localization properties.
  • A participant challenges the interpretation of the photoelectric effect as a localization event, suggesting that it involves measurements of voltage and current rather than position.
  • Discussion includes the idea that the closest interpretation of photon localization may arise from experiments like the double slit, where individual photons appear to hit a detector screen, though this may also be seen as localization of the absorbing atom instead.
  • Another participant emphasizes that exact plane-wave states are generalized states and that real states must be normalizable, leading to the conclusion that photons, as massless quanta, lack a strict position observable.
  • It is highlighted that what can be observed regarding photon localization is limited to the probability distribution of detection events, which are influenced by the localization of the atoms or molecules involved in the interaction.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the localization of photons, with some arguing against the possibility of localization and others suggesting that certain experimental contexts imply a form of localization. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the interpretation of photon localization.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge limitations in the definitions and assumptions surrounding photon states and localization, particularly in relation to the measurement processes involved in experiments like the photoelectric effect.

QuasarBoy543298
Messages
32
Reaction score
2
a photon have defined frequency , but we treat it as a localized particle ,how that can be?

if i am looking at second quantisation, photons are modes of the electromagnetic field , and they are not localized at all , but we do know that photons are somewhat localized , like in the photoelectric effect for example .

so,what am i missing?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
saar321412 said:
we treat it as a localized particle
This is incorrect. A photon has no position operator so it cannot be localized
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: weirdoguy and vanhees71
saar321412 said:
a photon have defined frequency

Some "photon" states do, but others don't. More precisely, some states of the quantum electromagnetic field are eigenstates of the frequency operator, but others aren't.

saar321412 said:
photons are somewhat localized , like in the photoelectric effect for example

The photoelectric effect doesn't localize anything; there are no position measurements of anything involved. The measurements are of voltage and current.

The closest thing you will get to "localization of a photon" is in an experiment like a double slit with an extremely low intensity source, so you can see individual "photons" hitting the detector screen as dots, that build up an interference pattern over time. But even that can be interpreted as localization of the atom that absorbs the photon, not the photon itself.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dextercioby, Klystron, strangerep and 1 other person
PeterDonis said:
But even that can be interpreted as localization of the atom that absorbs the photon, not the photon itself.
I think that is key
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Indeed. First of all one should remember that in quantum theory an exact plane-wave state (i.e., momentum eigenstate) is a "generalized state" for free particles (i.e., not confined to a cavity of finite volume). A real state must be normalizable and thus only wave packets, i.e., with finite width in the momentum distribution are true states.

A photon is a one-quantum Fock state of the (asymptotic) free electromagnetic field. It is not localizable in a very fundamental sense. In contradistinction to massive quanta a photon, as the quantum of a massless spin-1- field, has not even a position observable in the strict sense.

That doesn't matter much, because all we can observe concerning the "localization of electromagnetic radiation" are intensities. For photons that's the probability distribution to detect them at the location determined by the detector. The physical mechanism on the microscopic level behind many usually used photon detectors is the photoelectric effect, and there the location of the corresponding atom/molecule from which the electron is emitted through interaction with the em. field determines the location of the corresponding "detection event".
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeroK and Dale

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
683
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 64 ·
3
Replies
64
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
752
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K