| Author |
Message
|
| Vosh |
 Posted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 6:39 pm Post subject: The Source of All Light |
 |
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 4
|
For the longest time, and according to every extant website, I believed that all EM radiation, light, came from the same thing; an electron is knocked up to a higher orbit and then upon falling back sheds a photon. Ok, but, then I read that an antenna makes radio waves because as they vibrate up and down, the lines of electric force emanating from them start waving, the same way waves move along a rope when you shake one end of it. So, now I'm confused. Radio and visible light are both EM radiation, right? What happened to the notion that all EM radiation comes from photons coming off electrons as they fall back to lower orbits?
So you know how to form your replies; I have no formal training. I'm Pbs Nova educated.  Many thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| SteveF |
| Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 5:25 am Post subject: Re: The Source of All Light |
|
|
Forum Bachelors Degree
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 464
Location: NC USA
|
| Vosh wrote: |
| What happened to the notion that all EM radiation comes from photons coming off electrons as they fall back to lower orbits? |
That statement is misleading. Change the word "all" to "some" and you are better placed.
Electromagnetic radiation can arise in many ways. Of importance to radio engineers is the fact that whenever an electron is accelerated it will give off EM radiation. So the idea is to have electrons surging back and forth in an electric circuit or an antenna. Then you can transmit.
There are many ways of creating EM radiation and each is associated with a particular range of energies, giving rise to EM radiation of particular frequencies. Visible light is most likely the result of the electron transitions that you described. Other regions of the EM spectrum are generated by other means.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| William McCormick |
| Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 8:13 am Post subject: Re: The Source of All Light |
|
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 03 Apr 2008
Posts: 1011
|
| Vosh wrote: |
For the longest time, and according to every extant website, I believed that all EM radiation, light, came from the same thing; an electron is knocked up to a higher orbit and then upon falling back sheds a photon. Ok, but, then I read that an antenna makes radio waves because as they vibrate up and down, the lines of electric force emanating from them start waving, the same way waves move along a rope when you shake one end of it. So, now I'm confused. Radio and visible light are both EM radiation, right? What happened to the notion that all EM radiation comes from photons coming off electrons as they fall back to lower orbits?
So you know how to form your replies; I have no formal training. I'm Pbs Nova educated. Many thanks. |
And I learned it that when you slow ambient radiation which is just electrons moving so fast they do not register, to our senses or most of our equipment. That these slowed electrons now become the effects we have come to know and love. Light, heat, radiation, gravity, even sound are all caused by electrons.
The waves created in matter. The vibrations the movements are all the effect of ambient radiation. Matter was believed by Benjamin Franklin to be particles of electricity just frozen or trapped. He called ambient radiation (electrons) the fluid that runs in between them. He called an abundance of free electrons a positive charge and a shortage of these particles of electricity a negative charge.
Great scholars have since changed that up so now we call an abundance of electricity that creates a positive pressure that can easily be demonstrated, wrongly a negative charge. Because someone had the notion and very little practical experience, that electrons were somehow negative when they misunderstood how a cathode tube worked.
A cathode tube sends electrons from the terminal currently marked (-) the anode, to the Cathode in the back of the tube. The Cathode becomes over excited and creates a diode, that creates a beam of electrons back against the flow of the power supply. This caused so much confusion and a pile of comical literature a mile high. The only thing not to funny is that modern scientists screwed up batteries and other devices by mislabelling them.
The anode actually has a positive amount of electricity, and a positive pressure. The cathode before excited has a shortage of electrons or a negative pressure.
Today the pressure in a battery runs from the (-) to the (+) terminal. Totally opposite of what our founding father Benjamin Franklin had almost by an act of God isolated and recorded for history. When his findings were laughed at by English scientists, he was pretty well assured that England was no longer moving in an upward direction. As we can be pretty well be assured our scientists are no longer moving upward.
These are frames captured during the destruction of a piece of copper wire. The torch on the right side of the screen is feeding DC current to the left side. The torch is charged (-) as currently marked on a car battery. However you may be able to note that the pressure is from the torch marked (-).
But to answer the question as an honors student, I was taught and lectured to, by a Universal Scientist from a local collage, that corroborated what the Grumman defense plant had already taught me. That it is all electrons, and pressure from ambient radiation.
The Grumman defense plant in the sixties could accomplish what we cannot do today. They could bend metal with magnetic fields, while it was cold. They could go to other planets and solar systems. In days or months. They knew what we exhale to survive.
They could boil ground water. Or effect the earths magnetic field. All with rather small devices that require little power.
There have been tests that appear to prove that matter is just electrons. I do not know what has happened to the test information. However at one time it was standard in my area. My area was different then other areas though. Our Mallincrodt Ammonia was labeled NO2.
All elements when pure, formed a Siamese bond with themselves. Pure hydrogen gas was H2, pure Helium gas was He2, Pure Argon was Ar2, pure Iron was Fe2.
If you understand that it is all electrons, you can also understand that matter has no mass and weight. Mass and weight is an effect of the pressure created by ambient radiation.
The distance between electrons that make up a proton, and the time it takes to transfer velocity from one electron to another, through an infinite chain of electrons.
Create a diode on one side of an objects surface and it will take off faster then we can explain the strength of its structure supporting its current shape, using multi-subatomic particle science explanations.
Electrons are as small, as what they believe is a photon, but is actually an electron. And a single electron can move the matter contained in our universe. An electron can never be destroyed.
Light works almost like electricity. When it is in a conductor it stays in the conductor and moves away from the surface of the conductor where it was introduced.
If you shine light through the side of a bar of glass or optical plastic, perpendicular to its length, you can note that it will only bounce off walls that run perpendicular to the wall the light is introduced. Light does not bounce off the wall opposite to the wall the light was introduced. When you shine a light or laser light through a bar the long way. It will bounce (apparently bounce) many times off the walls until it leaves the opposite end of the tube.
Click on the image to view it at its original size
Click on the image to view it at its original size
If you press objects up against the sides of the bar of plastic you can get the light to extend beyond the bar of plastic. So light and electricity to me are one and the same. This is how it was taught to me. This is how Benjamin Franklin found it to be. This is the science they used to classify the elements up to 86.
I said "apparently bounce", because in fact light does not bounce, if looked at, in its basic form and workings. Ambient radiation creates the rays of light. Ambient radiation does not bounce. This link below shows how ambient radiation carries light and never bounces.
http://www.Rockwelder.com/Flash/mrbill/mrbill.html
But I am at odds with most institutions on Earth.
Sincerely,
William McCormick
_________________
http://www.Rockwelder.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Cold Fusion |
| Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 739
Location: In the circuitous haze of my mind
|
| Quote: |
| Of importance to radio engineers is the fact that whenever an electron is accelerated it will give off EM radiation. |
Will EMR also be given off if they are accelerated in a vacuum?
_________________
Forget all that you know, achievements can only be accomplished by starting from nothing and selectively applying facts that are purely objective and absolutely necessary.
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."
"Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence"
-Einstein
http://boinc.berkeley.edu/download.php
Use your computing strength for science! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| SteveF |
| Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 6:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Bachelors Degree
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 464
Location: NC USA
|
| Cold Fusion wrote: |
| Will EMR also be given off if they are accelerated in a vacuum? |
Certainly.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Dishmaster |
| Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 11:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Junior
Joined: 30 Apr 2008
Posts: 258
Location: Heidelberg, Germany
|
| EM radiation is emitted whenever electric charges change their state of movement, i.e. they are accelerated. Positive and negative acceleration are included here. Even a circular movement is an acceleration, because the velocity direction (vector) is changed constantly. This can be observed e.g. in a cyclotron. The only exceptions are atoms in the old Bohr model, where atoms are regarded as similar to planetary systems. Here, the state of movement of an electron can only change in fixed packages (quantums). Therefore, in order to be able to radiate, electrons must change orbits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vosh |
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 4
|
| Dishmaster wrote: |
| EM radiation is emitted whenever electric charges change their state of movement, i.e. they are accelerated. Positive and negative acceleration are included here. Even a circular movement is an acceleration, because the velocity direction (vector) is changed constantly. This can be observed e.g. in a cyclotron. The only exceptions are atoms in the old Bohr model, where atoms are regarded as similar to planetary systems. Here, the state of movement of an electron can only change in fixed packages (quantums). Therefore, in order to be able to radiate, electrons must change orbits. |
Does this mean, then, that my answer is that, yes, all EM radiation comes from accelerating electrons, but that this happens under different circumstances; sometimes changing "orbits", sometimes moving in a current... but the common denominator is, they're accelerating? Hope that made sense. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| SteveF |
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 10:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Bachelors Degree
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 464
Location: NC USA
|
Â
| Quote: |
| Does this mean, then, that my answer is that, yes, all EM radiation comes from accelerating electrons... |
There are additional sources of EMR, such as nuclear processes. Electrons need not be involved.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vosh |
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 4
|
| SteveF wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Does this mean, then, that my answer is that, yes, all EM radiation comes from accelerating electrons... |
There are additional sources of EMR, such as nuclear processes. Electrons need not be involved.
|
Interesting. Could it be that I once heard that all visible light is the result of electrons shedding photons as the fall back to original orbits, I wonder... Many thanks for your indulgence. This forum has been the most helpful. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| MagiMaster |
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Junior
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 288
|
| Cherenkov Radiation is one way visible light can be generated from any charged particle, not just electrons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Cold Fusion |
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 739
Location: In the circuitous haze of my mind
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherenkov_radiation
| Quote: |
| Photons are emitted as an insulator's electrons restore themselves to equilibrium after the disruption has passed. |
Where does the energy to create the photons come from? I am assuming that the particles through induction give the surrounding medium the energy to emit the photons, but then to conserve energy the emitted mass particles must slow down, or reduce their frequency.
Is it possible to make a type of practical light bulb that accelerates electrons back and forth in a vacuum to generate light? or would this be pointless due to the inherent complexity and low emission compared to other methods?
_________________
Forget all that you know, achievements can only be accomplished by starting from nothing and selectively applying facts that are purely objective and absolutely necessary.
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."
"Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence"
-Einstein
http://boinc.berkeley.edu/download.php
Use your computing strength for science! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| William McCormick |
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 6:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 03 Apr 2008
Posts: 1011
|
| Cold Fusion wrote: |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherenkov_radiation
| Quote: |
| Photons are emitted as an insulator's electrons restore themselves to equilibrium after the disruption has passed. |
Where does the energy to create the photons come from? I am assuming that the particles through induction give the surrounding medium the energy to emit the photons, but then to conserve energy the emitted mass particles must slow down, or reduce their frequency.
Is it possible to make a type of practical light bulb that accelerates electrons back and forth in a vacuum to generate light? or would this be pointless due to the inherent complexity and low emission compared to other methods? |
Take a couple watt CB radio and antenna and put fluorescent bulbs around the top of the antenna. You will get your light.
We used to fool around when we were kids with this. You can hold the bulb standing on dry ground without a problem. It just lights up.
I would imagine you could make it much more efficient then five watts of power though.
This is the entire link.
http://www.rockwelder.com/History/WorldsFair/WF.htm
Sincerely,
William McCormick
_________________
http://www.Rockwelder.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Old Fool |
| Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 3:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 17 Jul 2007
Posts: 67
Location: England
|
Radio and visible light are both EM radiation, right? What happened to the notion that all EM radiation comes from photons coming off electrons as they fall back to lower orbits?
Electromagnetic radiation is frequently described in terms of both quantum theory and classical theory. The use of classical theory is often determined by ease and convenience. Quantum theory is used to describe phenomena involving small numbers of photons, such as the emission of one photon. For example, in describing the light emitted by a laser, the process of stimulated emission of photons from atoms within the laser medium would be described in terms of quantum theory - atomic transitions similar to those you have referred to. However, the propagation of light within the laser cavity is described entirely in classical terms - the light is regarded as an electromagnetic wave.
I principle, everything could be described by quantum theory but it could prove to be unnecessarily complicated when the number of photons involved is very large. Returning to the case of radio transmission - the electromagnetic field radiated from an antenna would normally be described quite adequately using classical theory. But such electromagnetic fields can be described in quantum terms by a process that is often referred to as "second quantization". In second quantization, the field is written in terms of what are called creation and annihilation operators. When this is done, the quanta of energy of the electromagnetic field are indeed photons.
The two scenarios that you have referred to are simply different ways of treating electromagnetic waves/photons - one is the classical approach and the other is the quantum approach. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| William McCormick |
| Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 6:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 03 Apr 2008
Posts: 1011
|
| Old Fool wrote: |
Radio and visible light are both EM radiation, right? What happened to the notion that all EM radiation comes from photons coming off electrons as they fall back to lower orbits?
Electromagnetic radiation is frequently described in terms of both quantum theory and classical theory. The use of classical theory is often determined by ease and convenience. Quantum theory is used to describe phenomena involving small numbers of photons, such as the emission of one photon. For example, in describing the light emitted by a laser, the process of stimulated emission of photons from atoms within the laser medium would be described in terms of quantum theory - atomic transitions similar to those you have referred to. However, the propagation of light within the laser cavity is described entirely in classical terms - the light is regarded as an electromagnetic wave.
I principle, everything could be described by quantum theory but it could prove to be unnecessarily complicated when the number of photons involved is very large. Returning to the case of radio transmission - the electromagnetic field radiated from an antenna would normally be described quite adequately using classical theory. But such electromagnetic fields can be described in quantum terms by a process that is often referred to as "second quantization". In second quantization, the field is written in terms of what are called creation and annihilation operators. When this is done, the quanta of energy of the electromagnetic field are indeed photons.
The two scenarios that you have referred to are simply different ways of treating electromagnetic waves/photons - one is the classical approach and the other is the quantum approach. |
Maybe you should just throw out all that stuff, and get back to the all electron universe?
Sincerely,
William McCormick
_________________
http://www.Rockwelder.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bit4bit |
| Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 6:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 14 Jul 2007
Posts: 623
|
| Old Fool wrote: |
I principle, everything could be described by quantum theory but it could prove to be unnecessarily complicated when the number of photons involved is very large. Returning to the case of radio transmission - the electromagnetic field radiated from an antenna would normally be described quite adequately using classical theory. But such electromagnetic fields can be described in quantum terms by a process that is often referred to as "second quantization". In second quantization, the field is written in terms of what are called creation and annihilation operators. When this is done, the quanta of energy of the electromagnetic field are indeed photons. |
Thats really interesting. When would a radio designer see fit to use this method?
_________________
Chance favours the prepared mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
