General > General Technical Chat
How does the electron make a photon in an antenna?
<< < (9/38) > >>
CatalinaWOW:
Another example that may make the apparent contradiction less jarring.  Take a simple silicon diode detector.  When a photon  exceeds the band gap energy it can boost an electron across the junction, resulting in current.  The band gap is large enough in silicon to require photons of visible wavelength or shorter to generate these currents.   Other semiconductors, InSb for example allow the lower energy photons of roughly 5 micrometer infrared radiation to boost electrons across the band gap.  But at room temperature thermal electrons also cross this bandgap in copious amounts making it impossible to notice the photon induced current.  So these detectors are cooled to cryogenic temperatures typically 150 K or less to make it possible to detect the photocurrent.  When wavelength is increased to the far infrared further cooling is required, down to a few tens of Kelvin's.  Radio photons have energies 100,000 times smaller than LWIR photons, and even if a material with appropriate band gap existed would require cooling to tiny fractions of a Kelvin to avoid thermal noise.

Both wave descriptions and photon descriptions are tools that work to describe physical phenomenon.  As far as we can tell they work at all wavelengths.  The photon tool just isn't very helpful at radio wavelengths and energies.  The increment of energy from a single radio photon is swamped by other sources of energy. 
TimFox:
The fundamental reason is that charge radiates when it is accelerated.
In an antenna, the oscillating current accelerates the conducting charge along the wire.
In a synchrotron, charged particles are accelerated centripetally (by appropriated magnetic fields) to follow an approximately circular orbit.
SiliconWizard:
Since time doesn't exist, neither does acceleration. So accelerated particles are just for the birds. ;D
aetherist:

--- Quote from: CatalinaWOW on January 31, 2023, 04:30:17 pm ---Another example that may make the apparent contradiction less jarring.  Take a simple silicon diode detector.  When a photon  exceeds the band gap energy it can boost an electron across the junction, resulting in current.  The band gap is large enough in silicon to require photons of visible wavelength or shorter to generate these currents.   Other semiconductors, InSb for example allow the lower energy photons of roughly 5 micrometer infrared radiation to boost electrons across the band gap.  But at room temperature thermal electrons also cross this bandgap in copious amounts making it impossible to notice the photon induced current.  So these detectors are cooled to cryogenic temperatures typically 150 K or less to make it possible to detect the photocurrent.  When wavelength is increased to the far infrared further cooling is required, down to a few tens of Kelvin's.  Radio photons have energies 100,000 times smaller than LWIR photons (Long-wave infrared or LWIR) , and even if a material with appropriate band gap existed would require cooling to tiny fractions of a Kelvin to avoid thermal noise.

Both wave descriptions and photon descriptions are tools that work to describe physical phenomenon.  As far as we can tell they work at all wavelengths.  The photon tool just isn't very helpful at radio wavelengths and energies.  The increment of energy from a single radio photon is swamped by other sources of energy.
--- End quote ---
Interesting. That kind of stuff is over my head. But if u are referring to my idea (that radio waves are not photons) then i am not sure how my idea relates to a silicon diode detector.
1. I guess that a silicon diode detector can detect photons. I don’t know whether a silicon diode detector can detect radio waves (radio waves are not photons). Can they?

2. U mention radio photons. I reckon that radio photons do not exist. I reckon that radio is due to em radiation (not photons), in particular radio is due to a changing em radiation, with a wavelength(s).
Hence if a silicon diode detector can detect radio waves then that detection is due to the action of em radiation not photons.

3. U mention thermal electrons. I reckon that electricity on a wire is actually elekticity &  is due to photons (what i call elektons) propagating along the surface of the Cu, not due to any movement of electrons in or on the Cu.
I reckon that electrons do not orbit the nucleus of an atom – elektrons orbit the nucleus. In other words an atom is elekticity orbiting a nucleus.
However, i do believe that electrons exist – but these electrons are photons that have formed a loop by biting their own tails (or in some cases other tails).
In any case i don’t believe that there is any such thing as a thermal electron. But praps u mean an electron that has been created by a thermal photon (i might be ok with that).
IanB:

--- Quote from: aetherist on January 31, 2023, 09:09:09 pm ---2. U mention radio photons. I reckon that radio photons do not exist. I reckon that radio is due to em radiation (not photons), in particular radio is due to a changing em radiation, with a wavelength(s).
Hence if a silicon diode detector can detect radio waves then that detection is due to the action of em radiation not photons.

3. U mention thermal electrons. I reckon that electricity on a wire is due to photons (what i call electons) propagating along the surface of the Cu, not due to any movement of electrons in or on the Cu.
I reckon that electrons do not orbit the nucleus of an atom – electons orbit the nucleus. In other words an atom is electricity orbiting a nucleus.
However, i do believe that electrons exist – but these electrons are photons that have formed a loop by biting their own tails (or in some cases other tails).
In any case i don’t believe that there is any such thing as a thermal electron. But praps u mean an electron that has been created by a thermal photon (i might be ok with that).

--- End quote ---

Why do you reckon all these things? Have you spent the last 200 or 300 years doing careful scientific experiments, evaluating the results and carefully constructing mathematical equations that show how to predict the results of new experiments? Have you been alive the the last 200 years to be able to do this?

Otherwise, it would seem you are simply talking through your hat.


--- Quote from: aetherist on January 31, 2023, 09:09:09 pm ---That kind of stuff is over my head.
--- End quote ---

If that kind of stuff is over your head, why to you feel qualified to expound upon it?
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod