The photon CAN transfer part of its energy to the electron and continue to exist. An example of this is Compton scattering, where a gamma ray transfers enough energy to the electron to ionize and move it out of the atom's potential well, but my question is about electronic transitions in the visible spectrum.
Nabeel: I will elaborate on my previous answer and address the fact that a photon transfers part of its energy in Compton scattering. Even when a photon is reflected from a "moving" mirror, the energy of the reflected photon changes (Doppler shift). Therefore, these are two cases that demonstrate that photons do not possess quantized energy. It is angular momentum that is quantized, not energy. When a photon is emitted or absorbed, it transfers ħ of angular momentum and the associated energy is also transferred.
Compton scattering is usually considered to be proof that photons have particle properties. However, Schrodinger analyzed this in a 1927 paper and showed that Compton scattering has a purely wave-based explanation. Starting on page 10-24 of my online book (available at the link below) I analyze both Schrodinger's explanation and then expand on this using my spacetime model of the universe. The energy transfer between the photon and the electron does not involve the transfer of quantized angular momentum, therefore only part of the photon’s energy can be transferred. The amazing part is that the wave-based explanation of Compton scattering is actually better than the particle-based explanation because the wave-based model explains how it is possible for an electron to undergo a discontinuous change in velocity in Compton scattering without accelerating through intermediate velocities.
http://onlyspacetime.com/
Nabeel: Your question probes the limits of our understanding of physics. Therefore an answer can be given in two different ways. One type of answer can be reduced to: What part of "quantum" don't you understand? This obviously is unsatisfactory. The other alternative is to propose a conceptually understandable answer which extends outside of mainstream physics. That is the approach that I will take.
The paper available in the link below proposes that everything in the universe (all particles, fields and forces) are all different manifestations of 4 dimensional spacetime. This explanation eventually produces quantification of energy. We start by describing the quantum mechanical vacuum. Field theory requires that the vacuum has energy density about 10120 times greater than the “critical” energy density of the universe obtained from general relativity. This paper explains how this enormous energy density is possible. Small amplitude waves in spacetime are proposed and quantified (amplitude, frequency and impedance of spacetime). Ultimately, spacetime is pictured as a sea of small amplitude waves which lack angular momentum and collectively possess superfluid properties. All superfluids isolate angular momentum into quantized units (examples given). Fundamental particles are proposed to be ½ ħ of quantized angular momentum which exists in the superfluid spacetime field which lacks angular momentum. Photons are a different structure with ħ of quantized angular momentum.
All of this gets to the answer to your question. Photons transfer quantized units of energy because they propagate in a superfluid medium which isolates angular momentum into quantized units. Quantized energy is a byproduct of transferring quantized angular momentum. The article goes into much more detail including the derivation of the gravitational and electrostatic forces.
http://onlyspacetime.com/QM-Foundation.pdf
From a geometric programming perspective electrons are vortexes which appear in areas of 1-less density (electron cloud) within what Prof Macken has referred to as 'Spacetime' (i.e. '-'ve eV). Photons are pulses within this medium where rapid spacetime 'sheering' is taking place.
They are ultimately two different conditions which exist within the same medium; the electron bound to the nucleus of the atom (hence +ve & -ve) & the photon sustained by its own momentum.
Within the specific conditions of the electron-cloud's geometry (i.e. arrangement of binding molecules), to be able to move to the next available stable higher state means an exact amount of sheer space to be added - i.e. the whole energy contained within the photon.
Nabeel: I will elaborate on my previous answer and address the fact that a photon transfers part of its energy in Compton scattering. Even when a photon is reflected from a "moving" mirror, the energy of the reflected photon changes (Doppler shift). Therefore, these are two cases that demonstrate that photons do not possess quantized energy. It is angular momentum that is quantized, not energy. When a photon is emitted or absorbed, it transfers ħ of angular momentum and the associated energy is also transferred.
Compton scattering is usually considered to be proof that photons have particle properties. However, Schrodinger analyzed this in a 1927 paper and showed that Compton scattering has a purely wave-based explanation. Starting on page 10-24 of my online book (available at the link below) I analyze both Schrodinger's explanation and then expand on this using my spacetime model of the universe. The energy transfer between the photon and the electron does not involve the transfer of quantized angular momentum, therefore only part of the photon’s energy can be transferred. The amazing part is that the wave-based explanation of Compton scattering is actually better than the particle-based explanation because the wave-based model explains how it is possible for an electron to undergo a discontinuous change in velocity in Compton scattering without accelerating through intermediate velocities.
http://onlyspacetime.com/
To John A. Macken,
I agree with your precepts in principle, because I see that de Broglie's equations predict 4 possible electron states dependent on the belief system of the observer. The fact that Maxwell's equations have 3 roots, and that none of these are spurious, lends credence to your work. The only difference I see is that music is the wave form creating and maintaining the vortexial energy we call gravity, while you cannot differentiate space with respect to time because they are not independent variables. Movement through space is time and so they are intricately connected. Dr. Fred B. Wood, my mentor in his last years, also believed that every member of every species is only separated by one number in a Galois polynomial. Otherwise, I love your work!
The simple answer is that radiation of a frequency f which is not of the form Ea-Ebwith stationary energy levels Ea and Eb of an atom induces electronic transitions with a prohibitively small probability. The reason for this is that transfer of energy from a radiation field to an atom is a resonance phenomenon, like exposing a bell to a sound field. Only certain sound frequencies will make the bell resonate. Of course, the quantum theory of atomic absorbtion spectra is well covered by most QM textbooks. It is not a chapter of physics with many question marks in it.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Physical Sciences
- Particle Physics