Vinaire's Blog

Reference: Spacetime 5: A New Model of Atom

Light (electromagnetic radiation) is a disturbance in space. Light spreads uniformly in space in all directions as it moves away from its source. The intensity of light decreases with distance, but the frequency remains the same. Frequency is the only discrete aspect of light. Each cycle of light represents an energy equal to the Planck’s constant ‘h’.

In 1905, Einstein wrote in his paper “On a heuristic point of view concerning production and transformation of light”:

“It seems to me that the observations associated with blackbody radiation, fluorescence, the production of cathode ray by ultraviolet light, and other related phenomena connected with the emission and transformation of light are more readily understood if one assumes that the energy of light is discontinuously distributed in space. In accordance with the assumption to be considered here, the energy of light ray spreading out from a point source is not continuously distributed over an increasing space but consists of a finite number of energy quanta which are localized at points in space, which move without dividing, and which can only be produced and absorbed as complete units.”

Why did Einstein assume light to be discontinuously distributed in space even when this idea was contradictory to the known wave nature of light?

.

The key reason was that Einstein wanted to explain how light of low intensity could still eject electrons instantaneously when shined over some metals. The energy of the electron followed the equation,

V₀.e       =       hf  –  φ₀

Where 

V₀.e represents maximum kinetic energy of electron

hf represents energy supplied by the photon of light

φ₀ represents energy consumed in ejecting an electron

This relationship was accurately verified by Robert Millikan in 1914 with great precision.

.

Einstein formulated the idea of light quantum (photon) based on the idea of ‘energy quantum’ suggested by Max Planck five years earlier to explain the blackbody radiation.

When heated, a blackbody radiated light at all frequencies. But the frequency distribution of that radiation could not be explained using the principles of classical physics. Max Planck used the “mathematical idea” of energy quantum to resolve the difficulty.

‘hf’ was the energy quantum suggested by Max Planck that was required to activate an “atomic oscillator” of frequency ‘f’, which then radiated light at that frequency.

.

In photoelectric effect, frequency was involved in ejecting the electron and not the intensity of light. Electron could not be ejected by light below a threshold frequency. Energy of the ejected electron then increased only with increasing frequency. An increasing intensity of light did not eject electrons below the threshold frequency. Above that frequency, the increasing intensity simply increased the number of electrons ejected.

At the threshold frequency f₀, light supplied the energy hf₀ to the atomic oscillator to release the electron. This energy had to be supplied as a bundle to activate the oscillator. So, the energy supplied by light had to be bundled in space.

.

Robert Millikan, who didn’t agree with Einstein’s particle theory of light, analyzed the absorption of light in photoelectric emission (see Section 9, Theories of Photo Emission, of Millikan’s paper). He noted that his experiments showed exact proportionality between the field strength and the force acting on the electron, which contradicted any kind of discontinuous structure in space. This leaves the only alternative that the energy supplied by light must bundle up within the metal.

Frequency triggers resonance in an oscillator of the atom. The initial amplitude of incident light determines how many of those resonances build up and discharge an electron. The amplitude has decreased as the wave front has spread. But it builds up very quickly in a resonating oscillator. The electron discharges at a certain amplitude of oscillator. Energy imparted to an oscillator per cycle of incident light is ‘h’. The more oscillators are exposed to light, the more energy per cycle is imparted. The oscillator discharges at energy ‘hf’.

If we assume that all oscillators in an area can pool their energy to one central oscillator, and that there is one oscillator per atom, then ‘f’ atoms shall be pooling their energy to eject an electron instantly.

With this assumption we can calculate the amount of potassium required to instantly generate a photo electron. For potassium the threshold frequency is 5.537 x 10¹⁴ Hertz. One mole of potassium is 39 gram, which consists of 6.022 x 10²³ atoms. 5.537 x 10¹⁴ atoms of potassium would weigh 3.59 x 10^-8 gram. This is an extremely small amount.

Thus, when a very weak star light of threshold frequency falls on a very small area on film of potassium, it can easily eject electrons. We may thus assume that photons are generated upon the interaction of light with the photoelectric material, instead of assuming that photon must already exist in space.

The metallic surface must act as an energy lens to the light shining upon it. The energy carried by the wave front of light is then concentrated at the atomic oscillators within the surface as a photon.

We do not really need to postulate a particle theory of light to explain the photoelectric effect. We may simply postulate that the photon is created as part of the energy interaction.

.

From Wikipedia article on Copernican heliocentrism:

“Copernican heliocentrism is the name given to the astronomical model developed by Nicolaus Copernicus and published in 1543. It positioned the Sun near the center of the Universe, motionless, with Earth and the other planets rotating around it in circular paths modified by epicycles and at uniform speeds. The Copernican model departed from the Ptolemaic system that prevailed in Western culture for centuries, placing Earth at the center of the Universe, and is often regarded as the launching point to modern astronomy and the Scientific Revolution.”

From Wikipedia article on Galileo Galilei:

“Galileo’s championing of heliocentrism and Copernicanism was controversial within his lifetime, when most subscribed to either geocentrism or the Tychonic system. He met with opposition from astronomers, who doubted heliocentrism due to the absence of an observed stellar parallax. The matter was investigated by the Roman Inquisition in 1615, and they concluded that it could only be supported as a possibility, not as an established fact. Galileo later defended his views in Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, which appeared to attack Pope Urban VIII and thus alienated him and the Jesuits, who had both supported Galileo up until this point. He was tried by the Inquisition, found “vehemently suspect of heresy”, forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest.”

The geocentric viewpoint was so embedded in the minds of the 17^th century scientists that the heliocentric viewpoint took a long time to be accepted. But when finally that happened it created a scientific revolution.

The prevailing viewpoint in science today can aptly be described as matter-centrism. Current science looks at space and energy through the filter of matter. The Theory of Relativity looks at light travelling relative to matter. Quantum Mechanics looks at energy as discrete “particles” in the fashion of matter.

Recently I asked the following question on Quora,

Relative to light, all objects are moving at the “speed of light”. So what is the big deal about a spaceship moving at the speed of light?

This question innocently reversed the prevailing viewpoint on relativity. It looked at matter moving relative to light instead of light moving relative to matter. Nothing else was changed. The “speed of light” remained a universal constant as before.

But the protests were immediate. “Your opening assumption is not consistent with the known physics.” “There is no such thing as the frame of reference of light.” “To say we’re traveling at the speed of light relative to a light ray is superficially true, but irrelevant.” “None of what you said makes sense. That is not how speed of light is defined.” etc.

Why can’t we consider matter moving relative to light? Did Einstein provide a reason against it? Or, did he simply never consider it?

This question put on Quora was definitely jarring, but it was not out of line. Maybe it will improve known physics if we consider matter moving relative to light. There is no reason why light cannot be used as a reference. Our minds are conditioned to using matter as the basis. But we can certainly turn that around and pursue new paths.

If we take the viewpoint that all matter is already traveling at ‘c’ relative to light, then the motion among material objects seems to occur on a different plane. It is as if light forms the bottom of a lake, matter floats on the surface of the lake relative to other matter.

The theory of relativity correctly points out that there is no material aether. That makes space itself a medium in which light appears as a disturbance. This brings about a new concept of “undisturbed space”, which replaces the concept of “void”. The universe is now seen as a disturbance spreading out into undisturbed space.

The undisturbed space appears at the lower end of the light spectrum as frequency approaches zero. Matter then appears at the higher end of the light spectrum where increasing frequency finally collapses.

This Disturbance theory presents a “light-centric” approach, which is no less valid than the “matter-centric” approach. It opens the door to a whole lot of new possibilities. It does not change the “speed of light” as a fundamental constant. That constant can now be seen as the wavelength to period ratio that does not change while frequency changes.

There is nothing unscientific or illogical about the postulates of the Disturbance theory. Its basis rests in the recognition of an assumption that current science makes unwittingly. Recognition of this matter-centric assumption opens the door to a myriads of new possibilities.

This is good for science.

.