photon energy - which textbook do you recommend
DSeppala
Which textbook do you recommend that gives a scholarly explanation of
the following.
In the photo-electric effect, Einstein hypothesizes that a photon's
energy is proportional to the light frequency. I find that when the
picture on a TV changes from red to blue, there isn't a measureable
difference in the power consumption. Radio stations that broadcast at
AM frequencies don't use far less energy then stations that broadcast
at FM frequencies. For these simple experiments one has to introduce
a concept, sometimes called "photon efficiency" as sort of a fudge
factor to make the simple experiments agree with Einstein's concept.
In explaining these simple experiments with this correction factor, we
find that the energy in these practical experiments is proportional to
amplitude not wave frequency of the light.
Which textbook do you recommend that gives an objective scholarly view
of photon energy which embraces all these experiments?
Thanks,
David Seppala
Bastrop, TX
Dirk Van de moortel
96900a6a-9184-49cc...@o13g2000vbl.googlegroups.com
> Many have suggested I study textbooks instead of posting questions.
> Which textbook do you recommend that gives a scholarly explanation of
> the following.
Probably something like
http://books.google.be/books?id=KHvu1fjEK-MC&printsec=frontcover
>
> In the photo-electric effect, Einstein hypothesizes that a photon's
> energy is proportional to the light frequency. I find that when the
> picture on a TV changes from red to blue, there isn't a measureable
> difference in the power consumption. Radio stations that broadcast at
> AM frequencies don't use far less energy then stations that broadcast
> at FM frequencies. For these simple experiments one has to introduce
> a concept, sometimes called "photon efficiency" as sort of a fudge
> factor to make the simple experiments agree with Einstein's concept.
> In explaining these simple experiments with this correction factor, we
> find that the energy in these practical experiments is proportional to
> amplitude not wave frequency of the light.
>
> Which textbook do you recommend that gives an objective scholarly view
> of photon energy which embraces all these experiments?
> Thanks,
> David Seppala
> Bastrop, TX
On second thought, make that
http://books.google.be/books?id=1TR6XFQymbgC&printsec=frontcover
Dirk Vdm
dlzc
On Nov 24, 10:48 am, DSeppala <dsepp...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
> Many have suggested I study textbooks instead
> of posting questions. Which textbook do you
> recommend that gives a scholarly explanation of
> the following.
>
> In the photo-electric effect, Einstein
> hypothesizes that a photon's energy is
> proportional to the light frequency.
Actually, this is an experimental result. VLBA is based on it.
> I find that when the picture on a TV changes
> from red to blue, there isn't a measureable
> difference in the power consumption.
For a given intensity, there is a difference in "gun current".
> Radio stations that broadcast at AM
> frequencies don't use far less energy
> then stations that broadcast at FM
> frequencies.
They do for equivalent coverage areas.
> For these simple experiments one has to
> introduce a concept, sometimes called
> "photon efficiency" as sort of a fudge
> factor to make the simple experiments
> agree with Einstein's concept.
Ah, so you are entirely clueless. That does say a lot about the sort
of books to be recommended.
> In explaining these simple experiments
> with this correction factor, we find
> that the energy in these practical
> experiments is proportional to amplitude
> not wave frequency of the light.
>
> Which textbook do you recommend that
> gives an objective scholarly view
> of photon energy which embraces all
> these experiments?
I'd start by recommending books on abnormal psychology, or devoted
perhaps to Autism. What kind of meds are you supposed to be taking,
but aren't? That might help the diagnosis.
David A. Smith
PD
> Many have suggested I study textbooks instead of posting questions.
> Which textbook do you recommend that gives a scholarly explanation of
> the following.
>
> In the photo-electric effect, Einstein hypothesizes that a photon's
> energy is proportional to the light frequency. I find that when the
> picture on a TV changes from red to blue, there isn't a measureable
> difference in the power consumption.
That is true. What makes you think that the number of photons emitted
in the red case is the same as the number of photons emitted in the
blue case?
And what makes you think that the power consumption in a TV is
dominated by the energy of the light that is generated from the
screen? Have you ever done a light meter measurement to see what the
wattage per square centimeter is at the TV screen, and compared that
to the wattage consumed by the TV as a whole? Is it possible that
there IS a difference in the power delivered by the light at the front
of the screen (as measured by a light meter) that is barely noticeable
when compared to the total power consumed by the TV?
> Radio stations that broadcast at
> AM frequencies don't use far less energy then stations that broadcast
> at FM frequencies.
Similar questions would apply here as in the TV case above.
> For these simple experiments one has to introduce
> a concept, sometimes called "photon efficiency" as sort of a fudge
> factor to make the simple experiments agree with Einstein's concept.
I don't think you have a grip on the difference between simple
experiments and vastly oversimplified understanding of common
applications.
> In explaining these simple experiments with this correction factor, we
> find that the energy in these practical experiments is proportional to
> amplitude not wave frequency of the light.
Nothing in what you have suggested above would suggest that.
>
> Which textbook do you recommend that gives an objective scholarly view
> of photon energy which embraces all these experiments?
I'm not sure I know what you're asking for, David. Are you asking for
a textbook that is an encyclopedia of answers to all questions you
might dream up on a subject, no matter how silly?
Androcles
"dlzc" <dl...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:589ca872-3129-4d54...@v15g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
Dear DSeppala:
On Nov 24, 10:48 am, DSeppala <dsepp...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
> Many have suggested I study textbooks instead
> of posting questions. Which textbook do you
> recommend that gives a scholarly explanation of
> the following.
>
> In the photo-electric effect, Einstein
> hypothesizes that a photon's energy is
> proportional to the light frequency.
Actually, this is an experimental result. VLBA is based on it.
============================================
Big photons, eh, Smiffy?
============================================
> I find that when the picture on a TV changes
> from red to blue, there isn't a measureable
> difference in the power consumption.
For a given intensity, there is a difference in "gun current".
=============================================
Now you are groping at straws.
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4337421.html
=============================================
DSeppala
> Dear DSeppala:
>
> On Nov 24, 10:48 am, DSeppala <dsepp...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > Many have suggested I study textbooks instead
> > of posting questions. Which textbook do you
> > recommend that gives a scholarly explanation of
> > the following.
>
> > In the photo-electric effect, Einstein
> > hypothesizes that a photon's energy is
> > proportional to the light frequency.
>
> Actually, this is an experimental result. VLBA is based on it.
electronics increases with increasing frequency of light. One cannot
logically infer that that means the energy of the incoming light is
proportional to frequency.
>
> > I find that when the picture on a TV changes
> > from red to blue, there isn't a measureable
> > difference in the power consumption.
>
> For a given intensity, there is a difference in "gun current".
>
> > Radio stations that broadcast at AM
> > frequencies don't use far less energy
> > then stations that broadcast at FM
> > frequencies.
>
> They do for equivalent coverage areas.
suggesting that a 100 megahertz signal uses 1000 times the energy than
a 100 kilohertz signal? Interesting.
>
> > For these simple experiments one has to
> > introduce a concept, sometimes called
> > "photon efficiency" as sort of a fudge
> > factor to make the simple experiments
> > agree with Einstein's concept.
>
> Ah, so you are entirely clueless. That does say a lot about the sort
> of books to be recommended.
>
> > In explaining these simple experiments
> > with this correction factor, we find
> > that the energy in these practical
> > experiments is proportional to amplitude
> > not wave frequency of the light.
>
> > Which textbook do you recommend that
> > gives an objective scholarly view
> > of photon energy which embraces all
> > these experiments?
>
> I'd start by recommending books on abnormal psychology, or devoted
> perhaps to Autism. What kind of meds are you supposed to be taking,
> but aren't? That might help the diagnosis.
type of tobacco that is generally available on most university
campuses?
>
> David A. Smith
DSeppala
> On Nov 24, 11:48 am, DSeppala <dsepp...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > Many have suggested I study textbooks instead of posting questions.
> > Which textbook do you recommend that gives a scholarly explanation of
> > the following.
>
> > In the photo-electric effect, Einstein hypothesizes that a photon's
> > energy is proportional to the light frequency. I find that when the
> > picture on a TV changes from red to blue, there isn't a measureable
> > difference in the power consumption.
>
> That is true. What makes you think that the number of photons emitted
> in the red case is the same as the number of photons emitted in the
> blue case?
many experiments one has to make the assumption that the number of
photons emitted varies with frequency which makes the energy
proportional to intensity not frequency.
David
> > Bastrop, TX- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
BURT
>
> - Show quoted text -
Photo electric effect is a quantum leap out of the last shell of the
atom caused by the absorption of a light wave in the aether.
Mitch Raemsch
dlzc
On Nov 25, 1:55 pm, DSeppala <dsepp...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
> On Nov 24, 1:35 pm,dlzc<dl...@cox.net> wrote:> Dear DSeppala:
>
> > On Nov 24, 10:48 am, DSeppala <dsepp...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > > Many have suggested I study textbooks instead
> > > of posting questions. Which textbook do you
> > > recommend that gives a scholarly explanation of
> > > the following.
>
> > > In the photo-electric effect, Einstein
> > > hypothesizes that a photon's energy is
> > > proportional to the light frequency.
>
> > Actually, this is an experimental result.
> > VLBA is based on it.
>
> In the photo-electric effect, after a
> threshold the energy of emitted electronics
... I think you mean "electrons" ...
> increases with increasing frequency of
> light. One cannot logically infer that
> that means the energy of the incoming light
> is proportional to frequency.
One must, if an energy balance is performed on the irradiated
surface. It is a simple relationship... energy in = energy out +
energy stored.
...
> > > Radio stations that broadcast at AM
> > > frequencies don't use far less energy
> > > then stations that broadcast at FM
> > > frequencies.
>
> > They do for equivalent coverage areas.
>
> If you exclude differences in modulation
> methods for AM/FM are you suggesting that
> a 100 megahertz signal uses 1000 times
> the energy than a 100 kilohertz signal?
> Interesting.
So you act stupid, and assume everyone else must be. It is your
"Vewlikovskian" argument, it had holes, I pointed them out, and you
pretend it is my problem. Interesting. Lousy debate tactic too.
But I would expect nothing more from you.
David A. Smith
BURT
>
> - Show quoted text -
Radio light passes through matter. Transparency is for visible light
not being absorbed in a window pane. This is proven because if light
is absorbed by the glass it would expand.
Mitch Raemsch
PD
> On Nov 24, 1:50 pm, PD <thedraperfam...@gmail.com> wrote:> On Nov 24, 11:48 am, DSeppala <dsepp...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > > Many have suggested I study textbooks instead of posting questions.
> > > Which textbook do you recommend that gives a scholarly explanation of
> > > the following.
>
> > > In the photo-electric effect, Einstein hypothesizes that a photon's
> > > energy is proportional to the light frequency. I find that when the
> > > picture on a TV changes from red to blue, there isn't a measureable
> > > difference in the power consumption.
>
> > That is true. What makes you think that the number of photons emitted
> > in the red case is the same as the number of photons emitted in the
> > blue case?
>
> That is the "photon efficiency" I referred to my original post. For
> many experiments one has to make the assumption that the number of
> photons emitted varies with frequency which makes the energy
> proportional to intensity not frequency.
Sorta. The relationship is simple:
P_tot = (N/t) * E_phot
where P_tot is the total power radiated
N/t is the number of photons per unit time radiated
E_phot is the energy of a single photon (at that frequency)
The power is therefore proportional both to the energy of the photons
and to the number of photons emitted per unit time. It is certainly
possible to keep P_tot constant by raising one factor and lowering the
other.
Does this seem complicated to you?
PD