Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

THE PHOTOELECTRIC EFFECT WITHOUT PHOTONS

Willis E. Lamb, Marlan O. Scully

Published Feb 1, 1968• 55 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

Photoelectric effect without photons, discussing classical field falling on quantized atomic electron

Related papers

Answer to Question #45 [“What (if anything) does the photoelectric effect teach us?,’’ R. Q. Stanley, Am. J. Phys. 64 (7), 839 (1996)]

Peter W. Milonni

The history of the photoelectric effect is described. An analysis that field quantization is not required for an explaination of the photoelectric effiect is also given. (AIP)

American Journal of Physics•Jan 1, 1997•13 citations

IONIZATION BY QUANTIZED ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS: THE PHOTOELECTRIC EFFECT

HERIBERT ZENK

In this paper, we explain the photoelectric effect in a variant of the standard model of non relativistic quantum electrodynamics, which is in some aspects more closely related to the physical picture, than the one studied in [5]. Now, we can apply our results to an electron with more than one bound state and to a larger class of electron-photon interactions. We will specify a situation, where the second order of ionization probability is a weighted sum of single photon terms. Furthermore, we will see that Einstein's equality [Formula: see text] for the maximal kinetic energy E kin of the electron, energy hν of the photon and ionization gap △E is the crucial condition, for these single photon terms to be nonzero.

arXiv:math-ph/0610023•Reviews in Mathematical Physics•May 1, 2008•6 citations

Experimental Distinction between the Quantum and Classical Field Theoretic Predictions for the Photoelectric Effect

John F. Clauser

Elsevier eBooks•Jan 1, 1983•0 citations

ON THE DETERMINATION OF THE STATISTICAL PROPERTIES OF LIGHT FROM PHOTOELECTRIC MEASUREMENTS

J. PEf Ina

A relation is derived between the probability distribution of the integrated intensity of light incident on a photoelectric detector and that of the emission of n photoelectrons in a time interval (t, t + T) from the properties of a quantized electromagnetic field. Both the direct and the inverse relations are derived, thereby enabling the statistical properties of light to be determined from photoelectric measurements. An explicit expression is given for the coefficients for calculating the moments ( W k) by means of the moments (n J) (] = 1, 2 ..... k). The correctness of the operations in which generalized functions occur is confirmed by some direct calculations. The significance of photoelectric detectors has been increasing of late. Since their response is proportional to the intensity of incident light (to the square of the amplitude of light) (more exactly, to the local mean time value of the intensity), one speaks of quadratic detectors. These detectors are of basic importance in the theory of the coherence of the electromagnetic field, since if we place N such detectors into N different points in space and if we lead the outputs of these detectors to the correlator we can measure the correlation (coherence) effects of the 2N-th order in the given field [1]. Such correlation measurements provide information on the energy distribution in the radiation spectrum [2], the angular dimensions of stars [3], and the state of polarization [4] and also enable the phase of physically important functions (e.g. the scattering amplitudes) [5] to be determined. Although in such experiments the properties of photoelectrons are studied rather than of photons, they reflect the basic properties of photons. Let the probability distribution Of the emission of n photoelectrons in a time interval (t, t + T) be p(n, T, t) - p(n) and let the probability distribution of the quantity W(T, t) = W = J'tt+r I(t') dr', where I(t) is the intensity of linearly polarized light incident on the photodetector (for simplicity we assume that the sensitivity of the photocathode is a = 1), be P(W). The quantity W can be regarded as a classical characteristic of the field, the quantity n represents the quantum characteristic of the field. Then, on the basis of such a semi-classical description, in which the field is described classically, but its interaction is described quantum-wise, one can derive the following relation [6]

•Jan 1, 1967•1 citation

Classical Field Theory of the Photoelectric Effect

Sergey A. Rashkovskiy

STEAM-H: Science, Technology, Engineering, Agriculture, Mathematics & Health•Jan 1, 2018•3 citations

The concept of the photon

Marlan O. Scully, Murray Sargent

The idea of the photon has stirred the imaginations of physicists ever since 1905 when Einstein originally proposed the use of light quanta to explain the photoelectric effect. This concept is formalized in the quantum theory of radiation, which has had unfailing success in explaining the interaction of electromagnetic radiation with matter, seemingly limited only by the ability of physicists to perform the indicated calculations. Nevertheless, it has its conceptual problems—various infinities and frequent misinterpretations. Consequently an increasing number of workers are asking, “to what extent is the quantized field really necessary and useful?” In fact the experimental results of the photoelectric effect were explained by G. Wentzel in 1927 without the quantum theory of radiation. Similarly most electro-optic phenomena such as stimulated emission, reaction of the emitted field on the emitting atom, resonance fluorescence, and so on, do not require the quantization of the field for their explanation. As we will see, these processes can all be quantitatively explained and physically understood in terms of the semiclassical theory of the matter–field interaction in which the electric field is treated classically while the atoms obey the laws of quantum mechanics. The quantized field is fundamentally required for accurate descriptions of certain processes involving fluctuations in the electromagnetic field: for example, spontaneous emission, the Lamb shift, the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron, and certain aspects of blackbody radiation. (The Compton effect also fits here, but see later under references 8b and c.) Here we will outline how the photon concept originated and developed, where it is not required and is often misused, and finally where it plays an essential role in the understanding of physical phenomena. In our discussion we will attempt to give a logically consistent definition of the word “photon”—a statement far more necessary than one might think, for so many contradictory uses exist of this elusive beast. In particular consider the original coining of the word by G. N. Lewis: “[because it appears to spend] only a minute fraction of its existence as a carrier of radiant energy, while the rest of the time it remains an important structural element within the atom…, I therefore take the liberty of proposing for this hypothetical new atom which is not light but plays an essential part in every process of radiation, the name photon!” (our exclamation point). Clearly the present usage of the word is very different.

Physics Today•Mar 1, 1972•146 citations
In this paper, we explain the photoelectric effect in a variant of the standard model of non relativistic quantum electrodynamics, which is in some aspects more closely related to the physical picture, than the one studied in [5]. Now, we can apply our results to an electron with more than one bound state and to a larger class of electron-photon interactions. We will specify a situation, where the second order of ionization probability is a weighted sum of single photon terms. Furthermore, we will see that Einstein's equality [Formula: see text] for the maximal kinetic energy E kin of the electron, energy hν of the photon and ionization gap △E is the crucial condition, for these single photon terms to be nonzero.
A relation is derived between the probability distribution of the integrated intensity of light incident on a photoelectric detector and that of the emission of n photoelectrons in a time interval (t, t + T) from the properties of a quantized electromagnetic field. Both the direct and the inverse relations are derived, thereby enabling the statistical properties of light to be determined from photoelectric measurements. An explicit expression is given for the coefficients for calculating the moments ( W k) by means of the moments (n J) (] = 1, 2 ..... k). The correctness of the operations in which generalized functions occur is confirmed by some direct calculations. The significance of photoelectric detectors has been increasing of late. Since their response is proportional to the intensity of incident light (to the square of the amplitude of light) (more exactly, to the local mean time value of the intensity), one speaks of quadratic detectors. These detectors are of basic importance in the theory of the coherence of the electromagnetic field, since if we place N such detectors into N different points in space and if we lead the outputs of these detectors to the correlator we can measure the correlation (coherence) effects of the 2N-th order in the given field [1]. Such correlation measurements provide information on the energy distribution in the radiation spectrum [2], the angular dimensions of stars [3], and the state of polarization [4] and also enable the phase of physically important functions (e.g. the scattering amplitudes) [5] to be determined. Although in such experiments the properties of photoelectrons are studied rather than of photons, they reflect the basic properties of photons. Let the probability distribution Of the emission of n photoelectrons in a time interval (t, t + T) be p(n, T, t) - p(n) and let the probability distribution of the quantity W(T, t) = W = J'tt+r I(t') dr', where I(t) is the intensity of linearly polarized light incident on the photodetector (for simplicity we assume that the sensitivity of the photocathode is a = 1), be P(W). The quantity W can be regarded as a classical characteristic of the field, the quantity n represents the quantum characteristic of the field. Then, on the basis of such a semi-classical description, in which the field is described classically, but its interaction is described quantum-wise, one can derive the following relation [6]
The idea of the photon has stirred the imaginations of physicists ever since 1905 when Einstein originally proposed the use of light quanta to explain the photoelectric effect. This concept is formalized in the quantum theory of radiation, which has had unfailing success in explaining the interaction of electromagnetic radiation with matter, seemingly limited only by the ability of physicists to perform the indicated calculations. Nevertheless, it has its conceptual problems—various infinities and frequent misinterpretations. Consequently an increasing number of workers are asking, “to what extent is the quantized field really necessary and useful?” In fact the experimental results of the photoelectric effect were explained by G. Wentzel in 1927 without the quantum theory of radiation. Similarly most electro-optic phenomena such as stimulated emission, reaction of the emitted field on the emitting atom, resonance fluorescence, and so on, do not require the quantization of the field for their explanation. As we will see, these processes can all be quantitatively explained and physically understood in terms of the semiclassical theory of the matter–field interaction in which the electric field is treated classically while the atoms obey the laws of quantum mechanics. The quantized field is fundamentally required for accurate descriptions of certain processes involving fluctuations in the electromagnetic field: for example, spontaneous emission, the Lamb shift, the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron, and certain aspects of blackbody radiation. (The Compton effect also fits here, but see later under references 8b and c.) Here we will outline how the photon concept originated and developed, where it is not required and is often misused, and finally where it plays an essential role in the understanding of physical phenomena. In our discussion we will attempt to give a logically consistent definition of the word “photon”—a statement far more necessary than one might think, for so many contradictory uses exist of this elusive beast. In particular consider the original coining of the word by G. N. Lewis: “[because it appears to spend] only a minute fraction of its existence as a carrier of radiant energy, while the rest of the time it remains an important structural element within the atom…, I therefore take the liberty of proposing for this hypothetical new atom which is not light but plays an essential part in every process of radiation, the name photon!” (our exclamation point). Clearly the present usage of the word is very different.