Article View: sci.physics
Article #1508Re: Defining Photons
From: SCOTT I CHASE
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 20:18
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 20:18
54 lines
3526 bytes
3526 bytes
In article <3942@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us>, snarfy@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us writes... > > If you are a college professor , the taxpayers or students pay > you to enlighten and clarify issues pertaining to your specialty. > Why then have you not yet found a word other than ``particle'' to > describe that which has no mass , to differentiate it from that > which does?. I think it's because some of you would prefer to > confuse people rather than teach them. The photon, as a concept , > would be more accurately described as a ``phenomena'' given the > difficulty you have manipulating it the same way as a > ``particle'' mathematically. (multiplying by zero ,for one > thing). > > I find it odd that you have a job. > > Jim Ostrowski Sorry, Jim. No one is paid to enlighten you. That's your problem. If you can't yet understand why physicists insist on calling photons a particle then perhaps you should examine your own shortcomings rather than taking foolish potshots at someone who was obviously willing to take the time to engage you in discussion on the question. Isn't this what you wanted in the first place? Now for some physics: Photons (and other bosons) are particles. But they *do* have an important property which distinguishes them from other particles. The question is - what does the classical limit of these things look like? For most particles, say an electron, you approach the classical limit by increasing the energy of the particle - putting it in a higher quantum level. For photons, you don't increase the energy of a single particle, but rather increase the occupation number of a given energy state. Photons behave classically when there are alot of them around. Electrons behave classically when one of them is at high energy. This is a fundamental difference, which emerges directly from the different methods of quantization used for fermion and boson fields, and directly leads to the dramatic classical difference between EM fields and lumps of matter. But in the quantum regime this distinction blurs considerably, leading physicists to class all these objects - photons and electrons and everything else, together as particles. Notice that masslessness have nothing to do with these questions. It a matter of spin, not mass. Massive bosons, such as the W or Z, if we were able to make enough of them to produce a semiclassical state, would behave much like photons, not at all like electrons. -Scott -------------------- Scott I. Chase "The question seems to be of such a character SICHASE@CSA2.LBL.GOV that if I should come to life after my death and some mathematician were to tell me that it had been definitely settled, I think I would immediately drop dead again." - Vandiver
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<24910@dog.ee.lbl.gov>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!mips!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ames!agate!dog.ee.lbl.gov!csa2.lbl.gov!sichaseReferences:
<3942@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!mips!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ames!agate!dog.ee.lbl.gov!csa2.lbl.gov!sichase From: sichase@csa2.lbl.gov (SCOTT I CHASE) Newsgroups: sci.physics Subject: Re: Defining Photons Date: 26 Jul 92 20:18:23 GMT Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory - Berkeley, CA, USA Lines: 54 Distribution: na Message-ID: <24910@dog.ee.lbl.gov> References: <3942@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us> Reply-To: sichase@csa2.lbl.gov NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.254.197 Keywords: Relating photons E=MC^2 criticism News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4