lördag 20 augusti 2022

Photon Foolishness and CO2 Alarmism

Einstein received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1921 for his 1905 discovery of the Law of Photoelectricity (discovered by Hertz already in 1887) based on an idea of light as a stream of light particles or light quanta later named photons, in a return to an idea of Newton abandoned since the discovery of light as an electromagnetic wave phenomenon captured by Maxwell's equations published in 1873.  

Einstein was not happy with the Prize motivation, since it explicitly stated that he was not awarded because of his theory of relativity, which he considered to be his main work, while he viewed his early work on photoelectricity rather as a misconception, since concerning photons/light quanta he confessed in 1951:

  • All these 50 years of conscious brooding have brought me no nearer to the answer to the question, "What are light quanta"? Nowadays every Tom, Dick and Harry thinks he knows it, but he is mistaken.
Unfortunately, the Tom, Dick and Harry misconceived idea of light as a stream of photon particles has survived into our days, in parallel with the wave picture, and has come to serve as the basis of CO2 alarmism in the form of Downwelling Long Wave Radiation DLWR of Back Radiation as a stream of photons from the atmosphere to a warmer Earth surface with a massive global warming effect. 

In the spirit of Bohr the particle and wave nature of light are not considered contradictory but simply complementary although behaving differently:  




The Tom, Dick and Harry particle misconception is captured in an incorrect Planck-Stefan-Boltzmann Law PSBL stating that a black body at temperature $T$ Kelvin emits/radiates heat energy in the form of light quanta/photons scaling with $T^4$ (per unit area and time), independent of the surrounding temperature. The radiation has a Planck spectrum scaling with $T\nu^2$ with $\nu$ frequency (modulo high-frequency cut-off scaling with $T$). The misconception is that the radiation is independent of the surrounding temperature based on a primitive idea of radiation as a stream of photon particles being ejected independent of surrounding. This misconception is widely spread and embraced by otherwise very knowledgable physicists and laymen. 

A correct PSBL states black body radiation scaling with $(T^4 - T_s^4)$, where $T_s$ is the surrounding temperature. In this form the radiation can be seen as a wave resonance phenomenon between black body and surrounding, see Computational Blackbody Radiation. 

The Planck spectrum scaling with $T\nu^2$ directly connects with the wave nature of light with the energy of a harmonic oscillator of frequency $\nu$ scaling with $\nu^2$. 

To fit this into a particle idea Einstein suggested to view a photon as a localised wave packet of length scaling with $\frac{1}{\nu}$ and energy scaling with $\nu$ (captured in Planck's formula $E=h\nu$ with $h$ Planck's constant). The total radiation from a a stream of photons would then scale with $\nu^2$ since $\nu$ photons of length $\frac{1}{\nu}$ (traveling with the speed light) would pass in unit time. 

Einstein thus in 1905 associated the energy $E=h\nu$ to a concept of light quanta, which gave him the Nobel Prize in 1921 with the Law of Photoelectricity taking the form $E+P=h\nu$ with $P$ electron release energy and $E$ kinetic energy of an emitted electron upon impact by one photon with energy $h\nu$, but then misled generations of physicists into a misconception of PSBL misused by CO2 alarmism, while his insight in 1951 that light quanta has no physical meaning passed by without notice.  

This post directly connects to the following recent posts:
and to a wave analysis of the photoelectric effect (p 97). The idea of light as a stream of photon particles is as misconceived as an idea of sound as a stream of phonon particles which you spit out when you speak, while we all know that sound is transmitted by sound waves as a resonance phenomenon from loud speaker to your eardrums carried by air. 

The idea of light from Proxima Centauri as the closest star to our own as a stream of photon particles traveling at the speed of light one by one all alone 40,208,000,000,000 km on a journey taking 4.37 years without ever getting lost in cosmic dust or atmosphere until finally being captured by a human eye, is to fantastic to be credible. Light as particles is not physics, as Einstein said.

PS Typical misconception of photon particles each one ejecting an electron thus creating photoelectricity:


Compare with Mathematical Physics of Blackbody Radiation describing instead photoelectricity as a wave threshold phenomenon asking for a high enough frequency for electron ejection. See also this post.

7 kommentarer:

  1. LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks20 augusti 2022 kl. 18:53

    The warmists cling to this incorrectitude because they cling to the incorrectitude of Planck.

    Planck (a former student of Kirchhoff and his successor as lecturer at Berlin’s Friedrich Wilhelms University) erred in confusing ‘temperature’ and ‘heat’ in The Theory of Heat Radiation [5, § 46], and in failing to properly validate Kirchhoff’s Law (from which he derived his equation). His attempt at validating Kirchhoff’s Law in his book is filled with errors… he had to redefine blackbodies to be predicated upon transmissivity (except idealized blackbodies by definition are opaque, zero transmissivity); he ignored absorptivity at the interface of the blackbody (he claimed that the state of photons on the surface and inside the material were identical, and that as a photon traversed through a material, it was successively absorbed); he used polarized light in his experiments (whereas thermal radiation is never polarized) and thus misused Brewster’s Law; and he, like Kirchhoff, cheated a bit by using a small chunk of graphite or carbon as a thermalizer (what he called a ‘catalyst’) in a perfectly reflecting cavity (which cannot otherwise exhibit a blackbody spectrum because the radiation field can do no work upon the walls nor the walls upon the radiation field). In short, Planck held a weird view of what photons were and how they interacted with matter. His definition of a blackbody didn’t even coincide with Kirchhoff’s definition (nor with the standard definition). Planck also erred in clinging to a long-debunked radiative model (Prevost Theory of Exchanges and its core tenet, Prevost's Principle), and his follow-on assumptions stemming from that led to his treating real-world (graybody) objects as though they radiatively emit willy-nilly without regard to the energy density gradient.

    Planck correctly stated:
    “Conduction of heat depends on the temperature of the medium in which it takes place, or more strictly speaking, on the non-uniform distribution of the temperature in space, as measured by the temperature gradient.”

    Do remember that temperature is equal to the fourth root of energy density divided by Stefan's Constant... temperature is a measure of energy density. In other words, Planck correctly stated that energy can only flow (the definition of ‘heat’) via conduction if there is a temperature (and therefore an energy density) gradient.

    Where Planck erred is in his clinging to the Prevost Theory Of Exchanges (and its core tenet, the Prevost Principle, predicated upon Caloric Theory, which claimed that light was a rarified material substance) in regard to radiative energy, which led him to eschew scientific reality (that energy only flows if there is an energy density gradient), to wit:

    “But the empirical law that the emission of any volume-element depends entirely on what takes place inside of this element holds true in all cases (Prevost’s principle).”

    The immediate corollary to Prevost’s Principle is that E = e… that the actual emission is equal to the disposition to emit, which is false, implying that an object must emit all energy it absorbs (the definition of idealized blackbody objects, which do not and cannot exist).

    A further corollary to Prevost’s Principle is that A = I * a… that the actual absorption is equal to the intensity of the incident beam times the disposition to absorb, which is again false, implying that excited quantum states have the same disposition to absorb as do unexcited quantum states (again, the definition of idealized blackbody objects, which do not and cannot exist). Of course, Prevost, in 1791, didn’t know of quantum states, so he couldn’t have known that the corollaries to Prevost’s Principle were incorrect.

    Prevost’s Principle was used by Gustav Kirchhoff to develop Kirchhoff’s Law of Thermal Radiation, which is likewise false because it is based upon a false premise. Kirchhoff's Law of Thermal Radiation is easily invalidated. I've got that invalidation, Claes, if you'd like it.

    { continued... }

    SvaraRadera
  2. LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks20 augusti 2022 kl. 18:53

    Likewise, much of what Planck developed based upon Kirchhoff’s Law of Thermal Radiation loses its universal applicability, specifically Planck Length, Planck Time, Planck Mass and Planck Temperature are now merely human-invented units of measure, rather than fundamental units of reality.

    The long-debunked Prevost Theory of Exchanges (first replaced by the Kinetic Theory of Heat, then by Quantum Thermodynamics) assumed that energy flowed without regard to energy density gradient, because only an object's internal state determined radiant exitance. This led Planck to make the further incorrect assumption in keeping with the Prevost Theory of Exchanges:

    “We shall now introduce the further simplifying assumption that the physical and chemical condition of the emitting substance depends on but a single variable, namely, on its absolute temperature T.”

    He correctly stated that energy transfer via conduction was predicated upon there being an energy density gradient, but for radiative energy exchange, he clung to the Prevost Principle (core tenet of the Prevost Theory of Exchanges, a long-debunked hypothesis from 1791 which was predicated upon the long-debunked Caloric Theory and which postulated that radiant exitance of an object was solely determined by that object's internal state, thus that energy could flow willy-nilly without regard to energy density gradient).

    Except the Prevost Principle would only work for an idealized blackbody object, and they don't actually exist... they're idealizations. And the object would have to be in an isolated system, and they don't actually exist... they're idealizations.

    A graybody object's radiant exitance isn't solely determined by that object's internal state, as the S-B equation plainly shows:

    https://i.imgur.com/QErszYW.gif

    In reality, an object's radiant exitance is determined by the energy density gradient between that object and its ambient, temperature being a measure of energy density (equal to the fourth root of energy density divided by Stefan's Constant).

    SvaraRadera
  3. LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks20 augusti 2022 kl. 19:37

    Although it is far beyond the scope of this paper, the sinusoidal 'waves' of photons are not actually waves... they're spirals.

    https://web.archive.org/web/20161024110935if_/http://staff.washington.edu/bradleyb/spiralsynth/fig3.1.gif

    https://web.archive.org/web/20181117044308if_/https://www.dsprelated.com/josimages_new/mdft/img449.png

    https://web.archive.org/web/20181117053048if_/https:/www.dsprelated.com/josimages_new/mdft/img463.png

    The first image above shows the real (cosine... labeled 'Re' in the image) and imaginary (sine... labeled 'Im' in the image) components of an electromagnetic 'wave'. When viewed in line with its direction of travel, it will appear to be a circle, and when viewed orthogonal to its direction of travel, it will appear to be a sinusoid, when in reality it's a spiral.

    This is because a sinusoid is a circular function.

    https://i.imgur.com/zofvpkI.png

    You'll note the peak amplitude of the sinusoid is analogous to the radius of the circle, the peak-to-peak amplitude is analogous to the diameter of the circle, and the frequency of the sinusoid is analogous to the rotational rate of the circle. You'll further note the circumference of the circle is equal to 2 pi radians, and the wavelength of a sinusoid is equal to 2 pi radians, so the wavelength of the sinusoid is analogous to the circumference of the circle.

    Thus the magnetic field and electric field (oscillating in quadrature about a common axis) of a photon is a circle geometrically transformed into a spiral by the photon's movement through space-time. This is why all singular photons are circularly polarized either parallel or antiparallel to their direction of motion. This is a feature of their being massless and hence having no rest frame (if a photon had a rest frame, no rest mass and no momentum equals nothing, so massless particles must remain in motion), which precludes their exhibiting the third state expected of a spin-1 particle (for a spin-1 particle at rest, it has three spin eigenstates: +1, -1, 0, along the z axis... no rest frame means no 0-spin eigenstate). A macroscopic electromagnetic wave is the tensor product of many singular photons, and thus may be linearly or elliptically polarized if all singular photons comprising the macroscopic electromagnetic wave are not circularly polarized in the same direction.

    This is also why photons do not really travel in a 'straight line' (the path of least space)... they travel along the path of least time. Since invariant-mass objects such as planets and stars warp (expand) space (and thus slow down time), this causes light to 'bend around' large celestial objects (the cause of gravitational lensing), which is the phenomenon which originally substantiated Einstein's Relativity theory.

    For a practical lab experiment, go outside on a sunny day and stretch out a Slinky so its shadow falls upon a surface perpendicular to the incoming sunlight... you'll see the shadow of the spiral of the Slinky appears as a sinusoid. Now turn the Slinky so its axis is aligned parallel to the incoming light such that the light is falling through the center of it, you'll see the shadow of the spiral of the Slinky appears as a circle. Our oscilloscopes show us a shadow of reality because they can only account for the electric field and not the magnetic field of electromagnetic radiation.

    { continued... }

    SvaraRadera
  4. LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks20 augusti 2022 kl. 19:38

    The above ties into vacuum polarization (due to the high charge density in the vicinity of the nucleus of an atom) creating a geometrical transform of resonant scalar quantum vacuum wave modes to a circular (spherical, given the DOF) orbital path of an atom's bound electron(s) (ie: the bound electron 'spirals' around the nucleus, (acted upon by the Lorentz force of the EM interaction between bound electron and nucleal proton(s) and sustained by energy from the quantum vacuum), which is why a bound electron must have an integer number of de Broglie waves in its orbit (the underlying reason for quantization of energy and hence the basis of Quantum Mechanics) or it sets up a destructive-interference orbit which lowers electron orbital radius, which is how and why electron orbital radius falls to ground state from a higher excited state when the excitation energy sustaining it in that higher orbital is removed). This is what feeds energy to a ground-state bound electron to prevent it 'spiraling in' to the oppositely-charged proton(s) in the nucleus. At its ground state, the energy obtained from the quantum vacuum exactly equals the energy emitted via virtual photons (magnetism... which all invariant-mass matter exhibits (usually diamagnetism, although certain electron valence configurations allow ferromagnetism to override the underlying diamagnetism)), as Boyer[1], Haisch and Ibison[2], Puthoff[3] and NASA[4] showed.

    [1] https://sci-hub.se/10.1103/physrevd.11.790

    [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20190713220130/https://arxiv.org/ftp/quant-ph/papers/0106/0106097.pdf

    [3] https://web.archive.org/web/20190713225420/https://www.researchgate.net/publication/13330878_Ground_state_of_hydrogen_as_a_zero-point-fluctuation-determined_state
    "We show here that, within the stochastic electrodynamic formulation and at the level of Bohr theory, the ground state of the hydrogen atom can be precisely defined as resulting from a dynamic equilibrium between radiation emitted due to acceleration of the electron in its ground-state orbit and radiation absorbed from zero-point fluctuations of the background vacuum electromagnetic field, thereby resolving the issue of radiative collapse of the Bohr atom."

    [4] https://web.archive.org/web/20180719194558/https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20150006842.pdf
    "The energy level of the electron is a function of its potential energy and kinetic energy. Does this mean that the energy of the quantum vacuum integral needs to be added to the treatment of the captured electron as another potential function, or is the energy of the quantum vacuum somehow responsible for establishing the energy level of the 'orbiting' electron? The only view to take that adheres to the observations would be the latter perspective, as the former perspective would make predictions that do not agree with observation."

    { continued... }

    SvaraRadera
  5. LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks20 augusti 2022 kl. 19:39

    This ties into the 2nd Law Of Thermodynamics (2LoT)... an excited bound electron is always trying to emit a photon to achieve a lower energy state, but the energy sustaining the bound electron in its current state prevents the photon being emitted because energy can only flow from a higher to a lower energy density region. When that excitation energy is removed, a photon can be emitted, electron orbit no longer has an integer number of de Broglie waves, a destructive-interference orbit is thus set up, and the electron falls to a lower state in which there are an integer number of de Broglie waves in the orbit. At ground state, energy flows from the quantum vacuum to sustain the electron in its ground state orbital as it emits Larmor radiation in the form of virtual photons (a point charge undergoing acceleration (in this case angular acceleration) in relation to its electric field will emit Larmor radiation)[5], which it does because the quantum vacuum is anisotropic (it fluctuates) under vacuum polarization in the high charge density in the vicinity of the nucleus of an atom. Thus 2LoT holds even in the quantum realm.

    [5] https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/9910019.pdf

    This ties into the very underpinnings of the meta-stability of invariant-mass matter (and hence the continued existence of the universe as we know it) and provides insight into the connection between classical and quantum theory.

    SvaraRadera
  6. LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks23 augusti 2022 kl. 21:03

    Personally, I find the relativistic case of the de Broglie-Bohm Pilot Wave Theory to be interesting. It does away with wave-particle duality. A double-slit experiment performed with invariant-mass particles (for instance, electrons) is interpreted as electrons 'riding upon' and thus affected by the waves of the EM field between emitter and target. In an environment where there was no EM field between emitter and target, we wouldn't see the interference pattern for invariant-mass particles (especially in the case of chargeless particles... there stands a chance of charged particles creating their own EM field upon which they ride and are thus affected by (the electric field and the magnetic field are two sides of the same coin... a static electric field viewed from a moving frame of reference will be seen in some proportion as a magnetic field, the proportion of which is proportional to the relative speed between electric field and observer), whereas we would still see it for massless entities such as photons.

    There are many (Dürr et al., Ghose, Dewdney and Horton, Nikolić, Sutherland), but as our mathematics and empirical observation abilities advance, these iterations of the base de Brogle-Bohm PWT will be successively weeded out, found to be unphysical, leaving us with a formulation which accurately models reality. I think Dewdney and Horton are closest to reality because their formulation allows the inclusion of gravitation (which does affect photon vector) and hews to the fundamental physical laws strictly, based upon energy-momentum flows. Remember that gravitoelectromagnetic interation is a physical reality, known about since 1893 as written about by Heaviside, and as validated by Penrose (1969), Williams (1995) and Stanford (2014).

    SvaraRadera
  7. LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks28 augusti 2022 kl. 00:08

    Claes,

    I don't know if this is of any help to you, but there's a paper which delves down to the quantum level to derive the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics:

    The Second Laws of Quantum Thermodynamics
    https://www.pnas.org/content/112/11/3275
    https://sci-hub.se/10.1073/pnas.1411728112
    "Whereas macroscopically only a single second law restricts transitions, we find that there is an entire family of more fundamental restrictions at the quantum level."

    SvaraRadera