Hello Dr Thamalu: No you cannot. Agreed you cannot see EM waves or radio waves like you can the sea waves for obvious reasons. Only the effects are felt. However, in order to to proceed ahead you have to study EM waves , Maxwell Eqs , tie them with relativity and later quantum mechanics . It is well nigh impossible to study Physics by getting rid of the term EM waves ; its like getting rid of Newton's laws

!!

I do not think so. As you said only the effects are felt. As far as we consider QM the essence of Maxwell's equations has nothing to do with physical waves but the probability distributions.

Contemporary pedagogy is dealing with EM a lot and as far as the students learn classical theories there's no problem but when they start learning QM and particle physics there is a huge distraction and confusion due to this physical wave concepts.

If we popularize there is no physical waves in modern physics but an approximation for something else there is no problem. I do not say to stop teaching classical theories at all. All I say is to popularize that waves are not considered as physical in modern physics.

May be on a macroscopic scale you might get away with it, but on a microscopic scale it will not be possible. Please remember, QM , relativistic theory et al are valid and efficacious on a microscopic level. The distinction b/w classical and Q physics is the appearance of the Planck constant 'h' which is not equal to 0 in QM. like eg E= h* frequency won't make any sense in CP!!

The solution is not to discourage this term, only to put in perspective that it is a quite valid generalized representation for calculation of free moving electromagnetic energy behavior at our macroscopic level.

This in no way invalidates nor contradicts the use of localized photons for calculation of electromagnetic energy behavior at the subatomic level at which it is emitted or absorbed.

No

Instead we should start thinking of everything else as waves. Everything is just ripples in nothing.

Dear Dr Thamalu: At some stage you may be able to discourage the usage --mellow it down because wave particle duality is a difficult to understand, but if you think you can eradicate the usage that is NOT Possible. It would be better and less conflicting if you were to regard Classical Physics as a limiting case of wave mechanics. You are right Probabilistic wave functions are required because of the uncertainty principle which is apparent at the Microscopic Level and hardly appears at the Classical Level: for a deeper analysis please take a look at the following useful link:

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/physics/chapter/24-3-the-electromagnetic-spectrum/

Regards--

The main problem is that everyone thinks as particles as solid, not as waves, because they appear solid at the classical level. Nothing is solid.

No, we should not discourage the terms "Waves" in the context of electromagnetics.

The description of EM signals as "waves" is still valid. The E and H fields undergo sinusoidal variations with time and distance and so are wave-like. The wave image is helpful in understanding many aspects of EM propagation. Likewise, the particle image is also useful. Bear in mind that waves and/or particales are images that are useful in understanding EM propagation and interactions.

Ijaz Durrani Malcolm White

There is no wave-particle duality in modern physics and classical physics is not a limiting case of wave mechanics.

Wave particle duality is an idea historically physicists struggled with.Schrodinger tried to build a quantum mechanics formulation as 'wave mechanics'. It failed ultimately. The interpretations were proved vain. (Equations are reinterpreted by means of probability.) So called quantum mechanical wave function has 3N dimensions for N number of particles (ignoring spin). There are no physical waves or wave mechanics in modern quantum mechanics.

Heisenberg formulated QM even before Schrodinger's wave mechanics and there is no physical analog to wave function. It's just a mathematical representation.

The popularity of wave particle duality and thinking Quantum Mechanics as some 'wave mechanics' are the exact reasons why I propose to discourage the term 'EM waves'.

Malcolm White

Dear Malcolm,

You wrote: "The main problem is that everyone thinks as particles as solid, not as waves, because they appear solid at the classical level. Nothing is solid."

Agreement. The thing is that localized charged particles and even photons do not need to be "solid" as often conceived of. They can perfectly be conceived of as a concentration of electromagnetic energy locally oscillating in EM standing mode.

I remember that I once inquired to you about antennas in context of a conversation you were having a year or so ago here on RG in which you mentioned "an oscillating electric dipole in vacuum". I then mentioned that I had located the math traditionally used to describe dipole antennas energy emission, and that it seemed to me that it only needed to be converted adequately to describe resonant bremsstrahlung photon emission, which was a task that I would be busy looking into later.

Actually, I found that this math is directly applicable as is to explain the mechanics of photons emission and absorption when I finally had a closer look. If interested in this analysis, it is now available in this final synthesis of my project on electromagnetism at the subatomic level:

Michaud, A. (2020) Electromagnetism according to Maxwell's Initial Interpretation. Journal of Modern Physics, 11, 16-80. https://doi.org/10.4236/jmp.2020.111003.

https://www.scirp.org/pdf/jmp_2020010915471797.pdf

Best Regards, André

Thank you André Michaud

I'll take a look. The energy is not just electromagnetic - I think the energy associated with gluons and perhaps gravitons (if they exist) is not electromagnetic.

Malcolm White

Dear Malcolm,

You comment: "The energy is not just electromagnetic - I think the energy associated with gluons and perhaps gravitons (if they exist) is not electromagnetic."

From my analysis, neither gluons nor gravitons are required to explain the related interactions. From what I understand, these interactions can all apparently be accounted for strictly from the electromagnetic perspective as applicable at the subatomic level. Also summarily described in the same paper, and in detail in referred to other papers.

Best Regards, André

No. The measurement of a periodic varying parameter is a handy way to communicate several characteristics and relationships that would be vary cumbersome without the "wave" equations and concepts. Also, if such measurement suggest wave behavior, we may conclude many other characteristics such as wave have inertia. So, the intensity variation of radio signals may suggest photons have inertia. However, describing quantum mechanical probability variation as a wave is inappropriate (except for the de Broglie double solution interpretation).

OK Dr Thamalu: Light itself is an electromagnetic wave ; how do you plan obviating its usage?

Ijaz Durrani

Light is NOT an "electromagnetic" wave. Several experiment reject the pure wave notion of light.

Thamalu Maliththa Piyadigama

Dear Thamalu,

You wrote: "Wave particle duality is an idea historically physicists struggled with.Schrodinger tried to build a quantum mechanics formulation as 'wave mechanics'. It failed ultimately."

I think you are not familiar with the reason why Schrödinger came up with his wave equation. It did not fail at all. It simply represents the axial resonance volume within which the electron remains captive when stabilized in the hydrogen ground state orbital, that de Broglie previously concluded had to be its least action state.

To my knowledge, it is still within this volume that electrons remain in resonance in hydrogen atoms when in the ground state, even today, just as 100 years ago.

Best Regards, André

Ijaz Durrani Please call me Mr.

Light was regarded as an electromagnetic "wave" in the past. But just as John Hodge mentioned it cannot be considered a physical wave now. Electromagnetic wave can be used as an approximation (Just like civil engineers consider earth as flat for their buildings, you can use it but it is just an approximation.). That's the problem I suggested. People think light and 'radio waves' are 'physical waves' for real. But they are not.

André Michaud Exactly it will give the answer because the equation Schrodinger got from his failed project can also be obtained from a different path, from accepted quantum mechanical principles. His equations should be expressed by the means of probability not by the means of physical waves.

1. There are no physical waves in quantum mechanics because two photon system cannot be expressed by a 3 dimensional wave function. You need 6 dimensions. For three photons you need 9 dimensions. Schrodinger could not formulate multi-particle systems by 3d waves. So called wave function is just a mathematical representation of probability.

2. Interference: The people believe in physical waves expect waves to be interfere. If multi-photon system is made of physical waves should interfere one another. But this is not the case. One photon interacts only with itself (Two states of the same photon can be added) in common interference experiments.

(Photons acquire different dimensions of there state vectors). So there are no physical waves.

Apart from that, de Broglie waves are not physical. If you use relativistic energy and momentum and calculate you'll see speed of de Broglie waves are greater than the speed of light. They are not physical. (Exactly what Schrodinger tried to do is to provide wave equations to de Broglie wave packets.)

Best Regards

Thamalu Maliththa Piyadigama

Dear Thamalu,

You wrote: "Exactly it will give the answer because the equation Schrodinger got from his failed project can also be obtained from a different path, from accepted quantum mechanical principles. His equations should be expressed by the means of probability not by the means of physical waves."

Of course, the EM-wave concept ends up just being a convenient mathematical representation of electromagnetic light propagation quite useful to represent the behavior of electromagnetic energy as we have to deal with at our macroscopic level. This in no way means that it has to be a physical wave even if some are convinced that it is. The method is useful all the same.

I don't really understand also why you think that the Schrödinger wave equation was a failed project, since it describes a real state of the hydrogen atom.

Also, his equation never was meant to represent a physical wave. It was meant to represent a resonance volume, just like the volume visited by a vibrating guitar string can be represented by a classical wave equation.

As far as I can see, his wave equation maps exactly the same volume as Heisenberg's probability distribution or Feynman's path integral.

From the electromagnetic perspective, it is even possible to define the electron axial resonance trajectory within this volume, and to explain its orbital stability within this volume. Analyzed in this paper:

Michaud, A. (2018). The Hydrogen Atom Fundamental Resonance States. Journal of Modern Physics, 9, 1052-1110. doi: 10.4236/jmp.2018.95067

https://www.scirp.org/pdf/JMP_2018042716061246.pdf

That was recently republished upon invitation in a slightly expanded form:

André Michaud. (2020) An Overview of The Hydrogen Atom Fundamental Resonance States. In: Dr. Mohd Rafatullah, editor. New Insights Into Physical Science Vol. 6. Chapter 5. West Bengal, India: Book Publisher International. 2020.

http://bp.bookpi.org/index.php/bpi/catalog/book/265

Best Regards, André

Thamalu Maliththa Piyadigama

Radar systems and nearly all modern communication systems use multi-photon beams that interfere with each other. The energy of a microwave photon is very small, so I do not think that it is likely that a photon that is delayed 1 millisecond after travelling 300 km to a target and back will be interfering with itself when it is combined with the reference signal in the radar. Can a microwave photon have 300 km length?

"Can a microwave photon have 300 km length?"

Of course not, but it probably needs to travel 300 km at c to complete one cycle of its transverse EM-oscillation sequence if this happens to match its frequency.

De ar Mr Thamalu --and Dr John Hodge -you have Sirs , indeed rocked the boat!!

Light as a wave: Light can be described (modeled) as an electromagnetic wave. In this model, a changing electric field creates a changing magnetic field. ... This is the form of the wave equation. So, Maxwell's equations do say that light is a wave. Please take a look at te following useful link:

https://www.wired.com/2013/07/is-light-a-wave-or-a-particle/

Radio waves, microwaves, visible light, and x rays are all examples of electromagnetic waves that differ from each other in wavelength. ... These waves are also called "electromagnetic radiation" because they radiate from the electrically charged particles.

Why light is called an electromagnetic wave?

The waves of energy are called electromagnetic (EM) because they have oscillating electric and magnetic fields. ... If it has low frequency, it has less energy and could be a TV or radio wave. All EM energy waves travel at the speed of light. No matter what their frequency or wavelength, they always move at the same speed. OK Sirs, don't call it a physical wave like the sea wave, river wave et al --call it a disturbance, a signal.

"In spite of theoretical and experimental advances in the first half of the 19th century that established the wave properties of light, the nature of light was not yet revealed—the identity of the wave oscillations remained a mystery. This situation dramatically changed in the 1860s when the Scottish physicist James Clerk Maxwell, in a watershed theoretical treatment, unified the fields of electricity, magnetism, and optics. In his formulation of electromagnetism, Maxwell described light as a propagating wave of electric and magnetic fields. More generally, he predicted the existence of electromagnetic radiation: coupled electric and magnetic fields traveling as waves at a speed equal to the known speed of light. In 1888 German physicist Heinrich Hertz succeeded in demonstrating the existence of long-wavelength electromagnetic waves and showed that their properties are consistent with those of the shorter-wavelength visible light." Ref: https://www.britannica.com/science/light/Light-as-electromagnetic-radiation

Finally once you believe in QM -- you can't shelve away WP Duality.

Regards--

André Michaud

In 1 millisecond a microwave (radar) photon will have completed about 10 million cycles of its transverse EM-oscillation sequence. The wavelength (or the distance in which the phase of the quantum-mechanical statistical distribution completes one cycle, and also the electric and magnetic fields complete one cycle) is about 3 cm.

To talk about the electromagnetic wave we must have some insights about how electromagnetic and wave particle duality came into picture. In early 1911-1921, it was a tough period for the physics. There were various hypothesis by various classes of researchers. In those time British physicists were taking help of mechanical models to predict reality but german physicists were outragious about more modelling nature into abstract reality. Because of this the pulse hypothesis came into picture. In the same era Einstein was writing the future we currently know but is not known those times.

Because of this the photoelectric effect was making issue to both experimentalists and physicist. But the question was if photon the quanta of energy is considered, how such large energy density carrier is localised in electromagnetic wave. This lead to compton effect which ended this discussion by saying that photon interaction with matter obeys conservation of momentum.

The matter this time was about matter, does matter follow the same trends as like the photon. The answer to this was given by young researcher, De broglie with his ability to declare that matter is aso dual in nature.

The term electromagnetic is highly related with the works of maxwell some time back and was updated alot by the fictous aether hypothesis

Its been a long time since I saw people discussing who understand electromagnetism and know about its origins. Good to see.

Malcolm White André Michaud

"Radar systems and nearly all modern communication systems use multi-photon beams that interfere with each other. The energy of a microwave photon is very small, so I do not think that it is likely that a photon that is delayed 1 millisecond after travelling 300 km to a target and back will be interfering with itself when it is combined with the reference signal in the radar. Can a microwave photon have 300 km length? "

Not at all. It has nothing to do with the length of a photon.

When you say interference do you mean,

If it is a multi-photon system what happens to photons. Are photons also added to create new ones or are just annihilated. Then if so, do you suggest that the frequencies will be changed. Does red light interfering with reflected red light gives another color? What will happen to total energy? This is unlikely.

I used the clause 'photon interacts only with itself' in the sense Dirac used it in his Principles of Quantum Mechanics ("Each photon then interferes only with itself.

Interference between two different photons never occurs.") while describing so-called inference patterns of light. My statement should not be understood as photons having a massive size such that a part of a photon interacts with another part of it. I meant the state and probabilities.

Thamalu Maliththa Piyadigama

Dear Thamalu,

You quote Dirac: "Interference between two different photons never occurs."

He wrote this in the 1930's. We know now however that photons do interfere with each other:

McDonald, K., et al. (1997) Positron Production in Multiphoton Light-by-Light Scattering, Phys.Rev.Lett.79,1626.

http://www.slac.stanford.edu/exp/e144/.

http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.79.1626.

Best Regards, André