Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

5

In our modern understanding, every electron is thought to be a localized excitation of the electron (or Dirac) (spinor) field $\Psi(x^\mu)$, while every photon is considered to be an excitation of the photon (vector) field $A^\nu(x^\mu)$, which is the quantum field-theoretic counterpart of the classical four-potential. Thus, the answer to your questions ...


4

I cannot answer to all the questions but would like to stress something regarding what the Casimir effect tells us and what it doesn't. If you look at how it is derived for the usual EM interaction, an experimental verification of the standard Casimir effect tells us that: the EM field can have standing waves between two plates and outside them There ...


4

Quantum electrodynamics is needed to describe Nature instead of classical electrodynamics because quantum phenomena are observed – and have been observed at least since 1900 – which prove that classical physics in general and classical electrodynamics in particular is incorrect as a description of Nature and a better theory is needed. The quantum phenomena ...


3

Light, the classical electromagnetic field , is built up/emerges from a large number of photons, not in a simple manner. Photons are elementary particles and therefore can only be described within a quantum mechanical framework. They have a wave-function that obeys the potential form of Maxwell's equations turned into operators which operate on the ...


3

Quantum mechanics and classical E&M have created a whole bunch of fruit. In no particular order: Light is an electromagnetic wave. This means that we are routinely making light with LEDs and the like. It's pretty cool that you can design better antennas, or waveguides, or what have you. While we're at it, knowing why Stefan-Boltzmann radiation goes ...


3

If there were a $t$-channel or $u$-channel diagram for this process, it would have to involve a vertex where an electron changes into a muon and some other particle. There is no such vertex in the standard model.


2

charge is an intrinsic property of any particle. we in principle cannot change the intrinsic property of any particle. photons are the carriers of electromagnetic interaction(action at a distance).


2

The key to the effect is the idea - really just a conjecture, and as the paper states, "these ideas have not been met without controversy" - that there are materials that are opaque to gravity waves in the same way that conductors are opaque to EM waves. If that's true, then the cavity between parallel plates will contain a reduced set of modes of the ...


2

As an outcome of his PhD thesis work, Richard Feynman and John Wheeler wrote a series of papers on how the kickback on an electron as it emits a photon can be modeled accurately as the result of an "advanced photon" traveling backwards in time and striking the electron. No, the Feynman-Wheeler theory considers model of classical electromagnetic ...


2

It is pretty simple just use the following formula, $$ \int d^3 x e^{i(p+q)x} = (2\pi)^3\delta(p+q)$$ and thus on integrating $d^3 q$ you will have $\sqrt{2E(p)2E(q)} = E(p)$ in the downstairs, and then it's pretty straightforward.


1

The Cosmic Microwave Background includes photons that will not be absorbed before the universe inflates to the point where there is nothing to hit ever again. If parts of the last scattering were somehow barred from releasing that energy, I think we would notice. The photon carries energy. Particles do that. How is it any different from the electron, which ...


1

In the photoelectric effect however the photon seems to give all it's momentum and energy to the electron? No, the photoelectrons are emitted with a range of energies. The well known expression: $$ E = h\nu - \phi $$ gives the maximum energy, but photoelectrons are emitted with energies ranging from zero to this maximum value. The emission of ...


1

In terms of Feynman diagrams, a "coupling" translates to a vertex factor. The Lagrangian for a free electromagnetic field is $$\mathcal{L}=-\frac{1}{4}F^2$$ as you well know. Now suppose we have an electron field $\psi$ too. We want this electron field to "interact", or couple, with (to) the photon field. The free Dirac Lagrangian is ...


1

Yes, this is actually often used in a spectroscopic technique called REMPI -- see the image on this wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resonance-enhanced_multiphoton_ionization There are some important physics techniques that rely on interaction with two photons -- two photon spectroscopy (http://cua.mit.edu/8.421_S06/Chapter9.pdf). Some other ...


1

In QED there are vertex only with the same two lepton line and one photon line. I mean that there is not vertex when $\mu\to e\gamma$ in QED.


1

I have read the paper and the gravitational explanation of the Casimir effect is not the main point, it's the experiment that provides evidence of the graviton's existence. The paper starts by drawing a macroscopic analogy between Maxwell's equations and Einstein's linearized field equations (known as gravitoelectromagnetism). The author uses GEM because of ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible