0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Where does Gestalt Aether Theory fit into the Planck distribution?
What does quantisation of energy mean ? Basically it means that while observing black body radiation, the number of atoms taking part in the black body radiation is taken into account together with the wave-lengths and temperatures at different samplings of frequency and wavelengths.
It not only explains Planck’s constant in physical terms but also explains all the seemingly contradictory physical attributes of the photon:1. A photon possesses the attributes of both a particle and a wave
2. A photon has no mass
3. A photon always travels at the speed of light it is never at rest.
McQueen: Where does Gestalt Aether Theory fit into the Planck distribution?PmbPhy: Who knows. Not only have I never heard of it but it can't be found in the quantum mechanics literature or even in Wikipedia so it's most likely something conjured up by a crackpot.
McQueen: What does quantisation of energy mean ? Basically it means that while observing black body radiation, the numberof atoms taking part in the black body radiation is taken into account together with the wave-lengths and temperatures at different samplings of frequency and wavelengths.PmbPhy: Nope. You're confusing the quantization procedure as it was first used by Planck to describe the spectrum of black body radiation. Quantization of energy refers to the fact that for certain systems the energy levels can only take on discrete values rather than a continuum of values. For example; if there is an electron moving in the potential of that of an harmonic oscillator then the energy levels of the electron are quantized which means that when the energy of the electron is measured it can only take on a finite and discrete number of values. On the other hand if the electron is free then the energy is not quantized and as such the electron can take on any value whatsoever.
Contd. Gestalt Aether Theory and planck’s constant:...Two points should be understood here. (a) The energy of the emitted ‘photon’ is determined by the amount of energy it contains and (b) its frequency is dependent on the frequency with which each photon is emitted by the electron as for instance atoms radiating green light will possess electrons that are oscillating at 550THz ( photons emitted per second). The wave-length of the photon is determined by dividing the speed of light c by the frequency.
For instance in the final analysis, because of their physical construction, streams of photons can come together to give the ‘appearance’ of light of another colour. Take for instance a stream of photons of red colour having a wavelength of 750nm and mix it with a photon stream of blue colour having a wavelength of 500 nm, then wavelengths of 1250 nm and 200 nm would be produced. However, because of the manner in which our eye-sight perceives these frequencies. It is possible to see the mixture of these two wave-lengths of the colour purple or violet. Importantly the wave-lengths can separate as easily as they combine and still retain their individual energies, frequencies and wave-length.
That is a quite incredible amount of emissions, and they take place continuously for as long as the atoms are being excited or irradiated.
So the frequency of a photon depends on the rate at which it is being emitted by the electron.
ChiralSPO: This is not correct. It is possible to get additive mixing of photons as you describe, but it is a very inefficient process, and requires extremely high flux of photons. Maybe we are speaking at cross purposes here, by the mixing of photons to give new wave-lengths and colours, I was referring to the manner in which Newton first separated and then re-united white light. Such a process does not seem to be as difficult as the scenario that you refer to.
AlanCalverd: No, it depends on the energy difference between the states of the emitting electron. Loose phraseology can mislead the amateur physicist - as is evident throughout this forum. McQueen : Returning to your statement that emission depends on the energy difference between the states of the emitting electron, it is extremely interesting to note the distinction. The reason that I thought that it was extremely interesting to note the distinction is as follows: Your statement envisions the atom as being made up of several discrete energy levels: level 1, level 2, level 3, level 4, level 5 etc., then when a photon of x energy is absorbed by an electron at level 2, it absorbs enough (y) of the energy of the absorbed photon to make the jump to level 4 and emits the balance of the energy z(i.e.,x-y = z) as a photon of lower energy z. My reasoning envisions the whole of the energy of the photon being absorbed by an electron at level 2 it makes the jump to level 4 and then immediately jumps back to its original position at level 2 re-emitting the whole of the energy of the absorbed photon. Imagine the electron oscillating back and forth between the two states level 2 and level 4 and absorbing and re-emitting a photon at the rate of photons per second (note: that is identical to the frequency of the incoming radiation). This is what we term frequency and it would be equivalent to reflection. Expanding the view a little. Imagine looking out of a window onto a green lawn, imagine a blade of grass in this lawn, it is made up of trillions upon trillions of atoms, each of those atoms has one or more electrons oscillating back and forth at times per second. What results is a line of photons (as per Isaac Newton), with a frequency of and a wave-length of . Both wave-length and frequency are real and have nothing to do with complementarity.
What is incredible is if , as in the case in photon emissions, it happens all the time and no-one, over the past hundred years or so has made any reference to it. If you notice the texts and literature on this subject of photon emission are always very static , it is always a photon (notice the emphasis on the singular) is absorbed and a photon is emitted never any hint or inkling that it might indeed be a continuous process and indeed one that may be the basis of the term frequency as applied to photons.
... the experiment conducted by Lene Hau of Harvard University where it is claimed that light was stopped and then continued when energy was introduced. This surely debunks the whole of the Quantum Mechanics theory of reflection.
Maybe we are speaking at cross purposes here, by the mixing of photons to give new wave-lengths and colours, I was referring to the manner in which Newton first separated and then re-united white light. Such a process does not seem to be as difficult as the scenario that you refer to.
....absorbing and re-emitting a photon at the rate of 293a6e17a8b820d83d10ba4a38decfe7.gif photons per second (note: that is identical to the frequency of the incoming radiation). This is what we term frequency ....
Here is the answer: Violet and purple look very similar; but violet is a true color,
In what way does the result of that experiment ( the stopping of light) support a continuous emission process. I should think that the stopping of light is as sure a nail in the coffin of that particular theory, (theory of continuous emission) as you could hope to find.
Till as late as the Elizabethan Age, sailors believed that they would sail off the edge of the world.
Colin2B: This is exactly the same response chiralSPO and myself gave you, why do you insist on your own misinterpretation of maths you don't understand. You might not understand it, but that does not make it wrong.-