🚀 go-pugleaf

> The Compton effect was historically the nail in the coffin of such
> semi-classical explanations.  But I disagree with Martin Green when he
> writes:
> 
>     There is NO honest way of helping high school students understand
>     the dual nature of light, because all the "ordinary" quantum
>     effects can be explained by the quantum properties of matter.
> 
> I think Martin Green is confusing "evidence for" with "mathematical
> proof of".  I believe it is intellectually honest to tell high-school
> students that Planck's black-body formula, and the photo-electric
> effect, and a bunch of other stuff, lead to our current picture......

If it's the Compton effect which demonstrates that light is made of
particles, then why is it "intellectually honest" to tell high school
students that the photo-electric effect cannot be explained by classical
waves?

I took two full-year grad-level courses in quantum mechanics. I think
that's as much QM as anyone takes on the way to becoming a physics
professor. We didn't cover the Compton effect, so I can't say whether or
not it could be explained by classical waves. All I know is that the
traditional explanation of how the photo-electric effect does or doesn't
work is based on ignorance of the laws of classical electromagnetics.

Martin Green