Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    sci.optics    |    Discussion relating to the science of op    |    12,750 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 11,901 of 12,750    |
|    Jeroen Belleman to RichD    |
|    Re: a single photon    |
|    22 Jul 14 09:23:19    |
      From: jeroen@nospam.please              On 2014-07-21 23:55, RichD wrote:       > Let's say you radiate a pulse of energy from       > a dipole antenna at 100 MHz, equal to a single       > photon. Sort of tiny, but elctrical engineers       > are a clever lot, I'm sure they're up to it.              It *would be* a tiny amount of energy, about 6.6e-26 J,       well below anything we know how to detect or even generate       with any kind of reliability.              >       > Now according to Maxwell, you get a EM wave       > [...]       >       > But according to Planck et al., which we       > accept as truer, there's just a single photon,       > [...]              I'm firmly in Maxwell's camp. It's just that to detect       radiation, you need to use detectors made of matter.              Matter consists of little discrete thingies, held together       by elastic forces, constantly being jostled by a pervading       field of thermal radiation. At some random instants, one       of these thingies might get dislodged and rattle down       through the structure with enough racket to be noticed.              The presence of your 100 MHz field modifies the chances of       this happening a tiny bit, but you'd have to look for a       very long time to notice any difference.              Jeroen Belleman              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca