ON THE NATURE OF LIGHT by John R. Majka January 13, 1991
INTRODUCTION
It has long been assumed that light is an electromagnetic wave. Elementary classical physics shows that light photons are not comparable to an electromagnetic wave. While light photons do have some characteristics of EM waves, that is not sufficient to c lassify them as EM waves, or as parts of EM waves, since there a differences which are more important than their similarities. Relatively recent experiments with high speed particles shows that these particles behave almost exactly as light photons behav e. It therefore appears that light photons are particles of electron decay and are similar to the particles emitted by the decay of a nucleous.
Since a light photon is generated by a single electron, the comments on EM waves shall be considered as if the EM wave were generated by a single electron.
It is assumed that the reader has a familiarity with elementary classical physics.
DIFFERENCES IN GENERATION
MODE
An EM wave can generated by a "free" electron, that is, one which is not bound to a nucleous.
A Light photon must be generated by an electron bound to a nucleous.
CONTINUOUS VS DISCRETE
EM waves are created by the acceleration of a charged particle, as demonstrated by Gauss and Maxwell. This particle is usually an electron. As long as the acceleration continues, the EM wave continues to be generated. A sinusoidal oscillatory motion is continuous acceleration. If an electron is in sinusoidal oscillatory motion, an EM wave will be continuously generated and propagated.
Light is thought to be composed of discrete packets (quanta) of energy called photons created when an electron drops from one orbit to a lower orbit. This is a discrete process. In order to generate another light photon, an electron must acquire energy.
Further Discussion: Energy must be applied in order to keep a free electron in sinusoidal oscillatory motion, of course. However, it is possible to keep the same free, single and unique electron in sinusoidal oscillatory motion to continuously generate an EM wave. If energy is continously applied to raise a bound electron to a higher orbit, it can not be determined that that same, single and unique electron will be effected. Nor can it be determined that that same, single and unique electron will move to exactly the same orbit as it previously held. Nor can it be said that that same, single and unique electron, if raised to a higher orbit, is the one which will fall to fill the hole in the lower orbit. Any other electron bound to the nucleous may fall into the lower orbit.
Also, it is not necessary for a full sinusoidal oscillatory cycle to be completed to generate an EM wave. An EM wave consisting of any portion of the sinusoidal cycle can be generated or even one with no sinusoidal oscillatory cycle. There is no lower l imit on the portion of an EM wave which can be generated and propogated. However, only a full and complete light photon can be generated.
ELECTRON PATH
For most efficient propagation, the length of the path of an electron in sinusoidal oscillatory motion generating an EM wave is one-half of the wave length of the wave.
The half wave length of light is 5 to 10 times larger than the diameter of the largest atom. In order for a bound electron to generate a light photon by following a half wave length path, it would have to leave the atom and become a free electron. When it became a free electron, there is no guarantee that it would return to the lower orbit nor even to the orbit of it's atom.
DIFFERENCES IN DIRECTION OF PROPAGATION
A single EM wave propagates in all directions which are at right angles to the path of the electron.
A single light photon is propagated in only one direction. The direction of propogation seems to be that which satisfies orbital mechanics for that electron. That is, the photon is ejected tangent to the electron orbit and in the same direction of the e lectron's travel. This is exactly the requirement which must be met in order for an object orbiting the earth (or any other body) to move to a lower orbit.
Further Discussion: A person with whom I discussed this effect pointed out that his light bulbs emit light in all directions. This is explained that there is a large number of atoms and electrons in the filament of a light bulb. The atoms are also agit ated by heat and in a highly random and disorganized motion. While a light photon is emitted in only one direction from an electron, at the time of emission, many electrons are emitting light photons and the directions are randomly oriented. This also e xplains the different colors in white light.
DIFFERENCES IN ENERGY MEASUREMENT
The energy density equation for an EM wave is:
U = e(0) * V^2
where "U" is the energy per cubic meter, "e(0)" is the permittivity of free space, "*" indicates multiplication, "V" is the strength of the electric field in volts per meter and "V^2" is the strength of the electric field squared. (Normally, "E" is used to indicate the electric field, however, the use of that symbol here may lead to confusion here.)
The energy of a light photon is:
E = h * f
where "E" is the energy of the light photon, "h" is Planck's Constant and "f" is the frequency of the light photon.
Further Discussion: Note that for an EM wave, the term used is ENERGY DENSITY while for a light photon the term used is ENERGY. Clearly, this indicates that a light photon is not an EM wave. If it were, they would have one and the same energy density e quation or energy equation.
Let us assume that we have a transmitter which generates an EM wave at the frequency of 30 Megahertz and with a power of 100 watts. If we change to 30.001 Megahertz, the power, and the energy density of the resulting EM wave, remains the same. However, if we change the frequency of the light photon, the energy in that photon changes.
Implication: There is dust and gasses in free space which absorb energy from light photons. When the energy of a light photon decreases, it's frequency decreases. Thus light coming from distant stars, galaxies, etc. may experience a red shift merely be cause it's light happened to pass through dust or gasses. Einstein's General Theory of Relativity has shown that gravity can lower the energy of light photons and this also produces a red shift. One must be careful in blindly applying red shifts to dete rmine the distance of far away astronomical objects. The path the light photons take and the gravitational strength of their source and objects they pass close to must be taken into account.
DIFFERENCE IN EFFECTS
ELECTRICAL CURRENTS
Any EM wave which impinges upon an electrical conductor induces an electrical current in that conductor which is of exactly the same frequency as that of the EM wave.
When light photons impinge upon an electrical conductor, no electrical current is induced.
Further Discussion: Please note that the photoelectric effect of light photons is an electrical current. However, only certain materials exhibit the photoelectric effect while all electrical conductors will have a current induced upon them by an EM wave . Also, the current induced in the photoelectric effect is a direct current. That is, it does not have a frequency. The current induced by EM waves upon electrical conductors is of exactly the same frequency as that of the EM wave. That is, the electrical current exactly reproduces the EM wave.
TRANSPARENCY
All electrically non-conducting materials are transparent to EM waves.
Only certain types of materials, such as clear glass, are transparent to light photons.
ABSORPTION
The absorption of EM waves by some electrically non-conducting materials is due to the physical size of the molecules or atoms of the materials. If the molecular or atomic physical size is on the order of one-half of the wave length of the EM wave, the m olecules or atoms will resonate and the EM wave will be partially or entirely absorbed. The energy of the EM wave is usually be converted to heat. This is what occurs in a microwave oven. The material remains transparent to EM waves of other frequencies .
The absorption of light photons is not dependent upon the molecular or atomic size of the material but rather on the color of the material. That is, upon the atom's or molecule's structure which does not usually include size. For example, a green object reflects light photons whose frequency is what we see as green and absorbs all other frequencies (colors). Therefore, the absorption of light photons depends on the electron arrangement within the molecule or atom and not on it's physical size.
REFLECTANCE
All EM waves, irrespective of frequency, are reflected only from electrically conducting materials. However, the density of the conducting material may effect which frequencies are reflected. This is what causes radio frequencies to "bounce" off the ion ized layers in the Ionosphere. When this occurs, all frequencies lower than the critical frequency are reflected. Higher frequencies are not absorbed but pass through the ionized layers.
Light photons are reflected from all materials, excepting glass and similar materials, depending upon the frequency (color) of the light photons. Otherwise they are absorbed.
A particular case arises when light photons strike an object at less than a certain angle to the horizontal (the critical angle). If this should happen, then all light photons, irrespective of frequency, are reflected.
PARTICLE SIMILARITY
DUALITY
Recent experiments have shown that high speed particles exhibit duality. That is, depending upon the experiment, high speed particles can behave as "waves" creating interferance patterns, etc. Or they can behave as particles.
Experiments over the last several decades have shown that light photons also exhibit duality.
ENERGY
Einsteins famous equation, E = m * c^2, describes the energy a particle of mass would have if it were converted to energy. ("E" represents energy, "m" represents the rest mass of the particle, "*" again represents a multiplication operation, "c" is the speed of light, and "c^2" indicates the speed of light squared.)
In 1924, Louis de Broglie thought since light photons can behave as particles, particles might also be able to behave as light photons and developed the de Broglie equation:
L = h / (m * v)
where "L" is the wave length of a moving particle, "h" is Planck's Constant, again, "/" indicates a division operation, "m" is the mass of the particle or object, "*" indicates a multiplication operation and "v" is the speed of the particle.
De Broglie developed his equation from the one for the momentum of light, momentum = (h * f) / c. Since c / f, or speed of light divided by the frequency, is the equation for the wave length of light (L), f / c is the inverse of the wave length ( 1 / L ). Using a little algebra, de Broglie came up with L = h / momentum.
In Newtonian physics, momentum is m * v, hence the de Broglie equation above.
However, if we go back to the equation for the momentum of light, that is, momentum = h * f / c and substitute the momentum of a particle of mass at light speed, m * c we get:
m * c = h * f / c
using a little algebra ourselves, we not get:
m * c^2 = h * f.
Einstein's equation for the energy equivalence of mass E = m * c^2 is shown in this new equation or:
E = m * c^2 = h * f.
That means that in order to convert a particle of mass into energy, we must get it up to light speed! But that's impossible...or is it? When a nuclear bomb is detonated, the energy released is said to be from matter converted to energy. Just how is it c onverted?
It has been shown by others that when a photon of sufficient energy is passed close to a large nucleous, the photon is converted into matter. It is split into a particle and it's anti-particle. Evidently, the large nucleous slows down the photon. The po sitive charge of the nucleous then forces the particles to separate by forcing the positively charged particle in a path away from the nucleous and the negatively charged particle in a path towards the nucleous.
If the nucleous converts a photon to matter by slowing it down, then the opposite is required to convert matter to energy, i.e., speeding it up to light speed.
PARTICLES AT LIGHT SPEED
There is no proof that the speed of light is the fastest speed at which anything can travel in this universe.
There is no proof that the speed of light is constant throughout the universe.
There is no proof that objects can not travel at the speed of light.
That light speed is the limit, that it is constant, and that ordinary matter can not travel at light speed are all ASSUMPTIONS. It is fortunate that these assumptions make equations result in desired consquences. However, that does not make them facts. They are still assumptions. If false premises are assumed, the rules of logic can still be applied and the results can look valid. Valid results, however, do not make the assumptions valid.
From the fact that high speed particles behave just like light photons and light photons behave just like high speed particles, it seems self-evident that they are two manifestations of the same thing. That is, light photons are particles travelling at t he speed of light or that particles are very slow light photons. At the very least, light is not an EM wave.
It was shown in a previous work by this author (THE UNIVERSE AS A TRASMISSION LINE) that when charged particles are brought up to the speed of light, they become electromagnetic waves. However, that work did not address uncharged particles. It seems evi dent that when uncharged particles are brought up to the speed of light, they become light photons.
IN SUPPORT OF THE BOHR ATOM
I have been told that the Bohr Atom has been discredited. What a shame since recents "photographs" of atoms by IBM laboratories seem to support the Bohr Atom.
The Bohr Atom is commonly shown as electrons orbiting a nucleous in much the same way the planets of our solar system orbit the sun. It should be realized that depictions of both are merely schematic. It is hardly likely that Bohr intended to show that atoms had only a two dimensional structure. However, limited to two dimensional media, that is the best that can be done. It seems quite likely that Bohr only attempted to describe a three dimensional arrangement. The same type of arrangement shown by the IBM "photos" of atoms.
I have been told that the "correct" structure of an atom is that of electrons moving about the nucleous in a wave which is described by probability. This does seem to contradict the IBM "photos". Also it seems to contradict logic. Probability is fine f or a lot of things. However, probability can also be used when equipment or theory is not adequate to explain reality. Probability creates ambiguity which some thrive on.
It is intuitively obvious that should, by some chance, the electrons about a nucleous become arranged in a two dimensional structure, they would very shortly move into a three dimensional structure due to the influence of the electrons upon each other, th e influence of the nucleous, and, most important, the influence of other atoms.
It is also intuitively obvious that the orbit of electrons about a nucleous would not be circular. The influence of other electrons within the atom and the influence of electrons from other atoms insure that a circular path would not occur. Or, if it di d occur, would not last long. However, this does not mean that the electrons do not maintain a certain distance, or limited range of distances, from their nucleous. It only means that their exact path would not be predictable unless the atom were entire ly isolated from outside effects.
If the effects of electrons from other atoms and from within the same atom were known. The path of any electron could be determined. Since it is not now possible to know that information, it is easier to describe the electron paths as probabilities. Th at does not make them wavicles, or what ever. The electrons are objects. We just don't exactly where they are.
Therefore, it seems that Bohr's description of the atom was quite accurate. A schematic, of course, but nonetheless, quite accurate.
