Aha! Chemistry with Prof Bob
  • HOME
  • NAVIGATION
    • Table of contents
    • Index
    • TALK WITH PROF BOB?
  • LEARNING MODULES
    • Chapter 02 Stuff, matter: What is it? >
      • 0200 Stuff, matter: A theory of atoms
      • 0201 Atoms: The building blocks of all stuff
      • 0202 People classifying stuffs. Why?
    • Chapter 05 Chemical reactions and chemical equations >
      • 0500 Chemical reactions and chemical equations. Overview
      • 0501 Chemical amount and its unit of measurement, mole
      • 0502 The Avogadro constant: How many is that?
      • 0503 The Avogadro constant: Why is it that number?
      • 0504 Chemical formulas: What can they tell us??
      • 0505 Chemical equations: What can they tell us?
      • 0506 Limiting reactants: How much reaction can happen?
      • 0507 Balanced chemical equations: What are they?
      • 0508 Chemical reactions as competitions
    • Chapter 09 Aqueous solutions >
      • 0901 What is a solution? And what is not?
      • 0902 Miscibility of liquids in each other
      • 0903 Like dissolves like? Shades of grey
      • 0905 Dissolution of ionic salts in water: A competition
      • 0906 Can we predict solubilities of salts?
      • 0907 Solution concentration
      • 0908 Chemical species, speciation in aqueous solution
      • 0909 Solutes: Electrolytes or non-electrolytes?
      • 0910 Electrolytes - strong or weak?
      • 0911 Concentrated, dilute, strong, weak
      • 0912 Species concentration vs. solution concentration
      • 0913 Weak electrolytes: Getting quantitative
    • Chapter 11: Dynamic chemical equilibrium >
      • 1100 Dynamic chemical equilibrium: Overview
      • 1101 Visualising dynamic chemical equilibrium
      • 1102 The jargon of chemical equilibrium
      • 1103 Equilibrium constants: The law of equilibrium
      • 1104 The law of equilibrium: an analogy
    • Chapter 22 Evidence from spectroscopy >
      • 2200 Spectroscopy: Overview and preview
      • 2201 Quantisation of forms of energy
      • 2202 Light: Wave-particle "duality"
      • 2203 Ultraviolet-visible spectroscopy
      • 2204 Beer’s law: How much light is transmitted?
    • Chapter 27 The greenhouse effect, climate change >
      • 2700 The greenhouse effect: overview
      • 2701 Is Earth in energy balance?
      • 2702 CO2 in the atmosphere before 1800
      • 2703 So little CO2! Pffft?
      • 2704 Does CO2 affect Earth's energy balance?
      • 2705 The "greenhouse effect"
      • 2706 Why does CO2 absorb radiation from Earth?
      • 2707 The "enhanced greenhouse effect"
      • 2708 Why doesn't CO2 absorb the radiation from the sun?
      • 2709 Why are N2 and O2 not greenhouse gases?
      • 2710 Doesn't water vapour absorb all the IR?
      • 2711 Carbon dioxide from our cars
      • 2712 The source of energy from combustion
      • 2713 Comparing fuels as energy sources
      • 2714 Methane: How does it compare as a GHG?
      • 2715 Different sorts of pollution of the atmosphere
      • 2716 "Acidification" of seawater
    • Chapter 27 Communicating chemistry >
      • 2700 Overview, preview
      • 2703 The jargon we use
  • TEACHERS' CORNER
    • T01 Communicating chemistry
    • T02 Beer's law
    • T03 Professional amnesia of the chemistry teaching professio
    • T04 Law of equilibrium
    • T05 Visusalizing dynamic chemical equilibrium
    • Information vs. knowledge
  • PERSONAL GALLERY
    • Family
    • Travel
    • Playful dolphins
    • The University of Western Australia
    • Kings Park
    • Perth
    • At work
    • 999 Thermodynamics
Module 2202

Light: wave-particle “duality”


Sometimes it seems to us that light is a wave, and sometimes it seems to be a stream of particles. What's going on?

​​What is light? Waves, particles, or both, or neither?

"Dual nature" of light?
​
Or, dual nature of our sense-making?

Why might we refer the 'dual nature' of light (with quotation marks), but the dual nature of our sense-making without quotation marks)? Prof Bob and Aussie try to sort it out ........
Aha! So we should re-word the title on Prof Bob's board? To ...... ?
Picture

KEY IDEAS - Light: wave-particle 'duality'

Picture
Scientists in the early 1900 contemplating the nature of light (rather than their navels). What a mystery! Can you pick out Einstein in this group?

What duality?

Scientists have discussed and argued about the nature of light for centuries: that is, they have debated the question “What is light?”

The nature of light is very complex, even mysterious, and seems to be different from everything else that we experience in our everyday macro world.

So scientists resort to explaining its behaviour in two different ways, depending on the circumstances – in some situations light behaves in ways that are best explainable by considering it to be a waveform, and in other situations its behaviour only makes sense to us as movement of particles.

Because of this, scientists frequently refer to the “dual nature” of light.

This does not mean that a ray of light light is a particle and a wave. Nor that it is a particle or a wave. And certainly not that it is sometimes a particle and sometimes a wave, depending on the situation.

In fact, light surely does not have a dual nature: it is what it is.

But because of our inability to understand what it is, we resort to two different models taken from phenomena in our common experience – waves and particles.

So a better label would be the dual nature of our explanations. And then there is no need for quotation marks (around dual nature) because this duality is real.
​
​

How did we come to this?


In the 1600s, competing theories about the nature of light were pushed by Christiaan Huygens (waveforms) and Isaac Newton (particles).

The wave model of light dominated for a couple of centuries. It successfully accounts, even quantitatively, for the phenomena of reflection, refraction, diffraction at slits and interference patterns.

But in the early 1900s, the photoelectric effect was observed. Ultraviolet light shone on the surface of certain materials gave rise to the ejection of electrons, the energy of which could be measured.

The photoelectric effect is not consistent with light being a waveform, and Einstein proposed that light is not a wave, but a collection of “packets” of energy – which we call photons.

Crucial experiments were conducted by American physicist Arthur Compton who made measurements on the interaction between light and electrons.

He showed that electrons set in motion by the action of a light ray behaved exactly as if they had been struck by a pulse of energy corresponding with Einstein’s relationship – rather than a continuous energy source.
​
​

Energy equivalence of a wave and a photon


Regardless of what light is, we can calculate the relationship between the energy of a photon (if we consider it to be a photon) and the frequency of the wave (if we consider it to be a wave).
​
Einstein deduced that the energy of the photon (E) is proportional to the frequency (ν) of the wave. This can be expressed as:
Picture
in which the proportionality constant, h, is called the Planck constant.

The accepted value of the Planck constant is 6.626 × 10-34 J s.
​
We can use this formula to calculate the energy of a photon from either the frequency or wavelength of the light.

For example, we see light with wavelengths in the range 650 nm to 720 nm as various hues of red. Let’s, just for example, consider light with wavelength λ = 700 nm.

From this wavelength and the speed of light (c), we can calculate the frequency of the waveform 
(ν), and then use that to calculate the energy of the corresponding photons (E):
​

Picture

​Photons with this energy are absorbed from white light if the energy gap between “allowed” energy levels of electrons in the absorbing species is exactly this value. The transmitted light will be blue-green.

Elephant waves

We don’t usually think of elephants as waves, do we? Or even mosquitoes. Or planets. But everything that has been said above, and the photon-wave energy calculation, is equally applicable to all things that we normally think about as objects, and all things that we normally think about as waves.
 
The ‘crossover’ region where it is sensible to consider both the wave form and photon form of the same phenomenon are approximately from electrons (on the high energy side) to x-rays (on the low energy side).
 
In principle, you can calculate your own wavelength when walking at a certain speed. Now there is a challenge!
 
​
​

And just imagine .......


The Planck constant is a so-called “universal constant” – unchangeable throughout the universe, like the speed of light, or the gravitational constant: not a value decided by a scientific world authority, but something we are lumbered with. Don’t drive yourself mad wondering why its value should be so ……
 
But just suppose that we were in a universe where the value of the Planck constant were far different. Then perhaps the perceived “wave-particle duality” might be applicable to human beings!? Imagine seeing Aunt Mary being diffracted as she approaches a picket fence (acting as a diffraction grating)! A world where we are waves (or objects, or both, or neither)?
 
Such musings are part of great stories “The Quantum Safari” and “Quantum Snooker” in a wonderful science fiction book “The NEW World of Mr Tompkins” (Authors George Gamow and Russell Stannard) published by Cambridge University Press. Challenge and delight yourself.
 
And there are a few other stories based on imagined values of the 
other universal constants. Such as a universe in which the speed of light is about 30 kilometres per hour.
 

​
Picture

SELF CHECK - Some thinking tasks

Picture
I was almost blinded by so many photons coming from the oncoming car.
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture

LEARNING CHEMISTRY FOR UNDERSTANDING

© The content on any page in this website (video, text, and self-check) may be used without charge for non-commercial educational purposes, provided that acknowledgement is given to the Aha! Learning Chemistry with Prof Bob website, with specification of the URL: ahachemistry.com.
Proudly powered by Weebly
  • HOME
  • NAVIGATION
    • Table of contents
    • Index
    • TALK WITH PROF BOB?
  • LEARNING MODULES
    • Chapter 02 Stuff, matter: What is it? >
      • 0200 Stuff, matter: A theory of atoms
      • 0201 Atoms: The building blocks of all stuff
      • 0202 People classifying stuffs. Why?
    • Chapter 05 Chemical reactions and chemical equations >
      • 0500 Chemical reactions and chemical equations. Overview
      • 0501 Chemical amount and its unit of measurement, mole
      • 0502 The Avogadro constant: How many is that?
      • 0503 The Avogadro constant: Why is it that number?
      • 0504 Chemical formulas: What can they tell us??
      • 0505 Chemical equations: What can they tell us?
      • 0506 Limiting reactants: How much reaction can happen?
      • 0507 Balanced chemical equations: What are they?
      • 0508 Chemical reactions as competitions
    • Chapter 09 Aqueous solutions >
      • 0901 What is a solution? And what is not?
      • 0902 Miscibility of liquids in each other
      • 0903 Like dissolves like? Shades of grey
      • 0905 Dissolution of ionic salts in water: A competition
      • 0906 Can we predict solubilities of salts?
      • 0907 Solution concentration
      • 0908 Chemical species, speciation in aqueous solution
      • 0909 Solutes: Electrolytes or non-electrolytes?
      • 0910 Electrolytes - strong or weak?
      • 0911 Concentrated, dilute, strong, weak
      • 0912 Species concentration vs. solution concentration
      • 0913 Weak electrolytes: Getting quantitative
    • Chapter 11: Dynamic chemical equilibrium >
      • 1100 Dynamic chemical equilibrium: Overview
      • 1101 Visualising dynamic chemical equilibrium
      • 1102 The jargon of chemical equilibrium
      • 1103 Equilibrium constants: The law of equilibrium
      • 1104 The law of equilibrium: an analogy
    • Chapter 22 Evidence from spectroscopy >
      • 2200 Spectroscopy: Overview and preview
      • 2201 Quantisation of forms of energy
      • 2202 Light: Wave-particle "duality"
      • 2203 Ultraviolet-visible spectroscopy
      • 2204 Beer’s law: How much light is transmitted?
    • Chapter 27 The greenhouse effect, climate change >
      • 2700 The greenhouse effect: overview
      • 2701 Is Earth in energy balance?
      • 2702 CO2 in the atmosphere before 1800
      • 2703 So little CO2! Pffft?
      • 2704 Does CO2 affect Earth's energy balance?
      • 2705 The "greenhouse effect"
      • 2706 Why does CO2 absorb radiation from Earth?
      • 2707 The "enhanced greenhouse effect"
      • 2708 Why doesn't CO2 absorb the radiation from the sun?
      • 2709 Why are N2 and O2 not greenhouse gases?
      • 2710 Doesn't water vapour absorb all the IR?
      • 2711 Carbon dioxide from our cars
      • 2712 The source of energy from combustion
      • 2713 Comparing fuels as energy sources
      • 2714 Methane: How does it compare as a GHG?
      • 2715 Different sorts of pollution of the atmosphere
      • 2716 "Acidification" of seawater
    • Chapter 27 Communicating chemistry >
      • 2700 Overview, preview
      • 2703 The jargon we use
  • TEACHERS' CORNER
    • T01 Communicating chemistry
    • T02 Beer's law
    • T03 Professional amnesia of the chemistry teaching professio
    • T04 Law of equilibrium
    • T05 Visusalizing dynamic chemical equilibrium
    • Information vs. knowledge
  • PERSONAL GALLERY
    • Family
    • Travel
    • Playful dolphins
    • The University of Western Australia
    • Kings Park
    • Perth
    • At work
    • 999 Thermodynamics