Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Why light go straight?

  1. Jan 29, 2005 #1
    In normal condition, light always go straight. But since photon move randomly, why must they go straight?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 29, 2005 #2

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    What do you mean by this ?
     
  4. Jan 30, 2005 #3

    Chronos

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2015 Award

    Straight with respect to what? Photons usually do take random paths, but they travel on geodesic paths once they chose a course. After that, they appear to travel along the same path, until disturbed.
     
  5. Jan 30, 2005 #4

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I think the OP may be confusing the random choice of a direction with the randomness that is associated with Brownian motion or the drunken walk.
     
  6. Jan 30, 2005 #5
    I think what the thread starter wanted is actually said in one of Feynman's books. In classical optics, light is seen as travelling in straight lines, but that is shows as an approximation of what really happens. Using the principle of least action, light does indeed travel in a straight line since that's the easiest path to travel.

    But according to QM, a photon can take several crazy trajectories, but if looking at the probability cloud of a photon, its mostly concentrated in a straight line. So in the context of QM, light doesn't really travel in straight lines, it just MOST PROBABLY would travel in a straight line.

    Am i right on this one?
     
  7. Jan 30, 2005 #6
    ^ at what speed does it travel on those other paths?
     
  8. Jan 30, 2005 #7

    DB

    User Avatar

    "c" 299 792 458 m/s
     
  9. Jan 30, 2005 #8
    A photon in Feynman's sum-over-histories has countless paths faster and slower than the speed-of-light that combine to give the speed-of-light path.

    We have to be careful not to think of a particle as having anything like a definite position and velocity at the same time, though, but we can describe it as series of definite positions at all times so as to make up these paths for the sum-over-histories, I think.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2005
  10. Jan 30, 2005 #9

    DB

    User Avatar

    Really? I did not know this. Could you elaborate more on this or maybe suply me with a link. If this topic has a name I'll google it.
     
  11. Jan 30, 2005 #10
    Actually, the "slower than light" bit I mention might not be right for photons. I remember now that was something I meant to check to see if it was a possibility. Oops. :blushing:

    I know that faster than light and even backwards in time histories are correct and appear in a sum-over-histories, though. :smile:
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2005
  12. Jan 30, 2005 #11
    Professor Feynman to the rescue! I was right about the slower than light histories for photons in a sum-over-histories. That's a relief. :biggrin:

    To quote Richard Feynman "...there is also an amplitude for light to go faster (or slower) than the conventional speed of light. You found out in the last lecture that light doesn't go only in straight lines; now, you find out that it doesn't go only at the speed of light! It may surprise you that there is an amplitude for a photon to go at speeds faster or slower than the conventional speed, c." - Chapter 3, page 89 of Richard Feynman's book "QED".

    Got that from:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster_than_light
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2005
  13. Jan 31, 2005 #12
    "Momentum" is the explanation that usually serves my purpose.
     
  14. Jan 31, 2005 #13
    Photons do not move randomly. QM is not just all about randomness - there are very strict rules about how objects can behave. In order to decide the probability that some system will start in classical state A and end in classical state B, we do the Feynman cookbooking (i.e. [tex]e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}S}[/tex] where S is the classical action of that history, and then sum this value for every possible history to get the probability (to within some proportionalirt factor) that the system will truly go from state A to state B). So it's not all random, there are precise rules. It was designed so that for macroscopic systems, the outcome is exactly the same as the classical outcome.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Why light go straight?
  1. Why light diffract? (Replies: 37)

  2. Why does spin go? (Replies: 1)

Loading...