A simple covariant derivation of the de Broglie relations breaks down when one considers propagation of light in an anisotropic medium. This breakdown results in two distasteful conclusions. The first is that the de Broglie relations are not completely universal and their covariance is restricted. The second is that wave-particle duality is not universal. In this paper a resolution of these problems is suggested, a resolution which is an extrapolation of ideas of de Broglie and Andrade e Silva. The relations are generalized for propagation in anisotropic media by defining a new phase wave with wave vector l in the direction of energy transport and distinct from the conventional electromagnetic wave. The introduction of l follows the method by which de Broglie associated a wave with an electron. The magnitude of l is omega u/c-squared where omega is the angular frequency and u the velocity of energy transport. The physical meaning of l and the covariance of physical laws in the presence of matter are discussed. An experiment is described which would test the existence of the phase wave associated with the new wave vector l. This experiment is essentially a Young two-slit experiment carried out within an anisotropic crystal. Keywords: Scattering; Anisotropic materials.
A simple covariant derivation of the de Broglie relations breaks down when one considers propagation of light in an anisotropic medium. This breakdown results in two distasteful conclusions. The first is that the de Broglie relations are not completely universal and their covariance is restricted. The second is that wave-particle duality is not universal. In this paper a resolution of these problems is suggested, a resolution which is an extrapolation of ideas of de Broglie and Andrade e Silva. The relations are generalized for propagation in anisotropic media by defining a new phase wave with wave vector l in the direction of energy transport and distinct from the conventional electromagnetic wave. The introduction of l follows the method by which de Broglie associated a wave with an electron. The magnitude of l is omega u/c-squared where omega is the angular frequency and u the velocity of energy transport. The physical meaning of l and the covariance of physical laws in the presence of matter are discussed. An experiment is described which would test the existence of the phase wave associated with the new wave vector l. This experiment is essentially a Young two-slit experiment carried out within an anisotropic crystal. Keywords: Scattering; Anisotropic materials.
By assuming wave‐particle duality for those phenomena in which the directions of energy transport and wave propagation are co‐parallel, one can show the co‐variant nature of the deBroglie energy‐frequency and momentum‐wave vector relations. If the energy transport and wave propagation are not parallel, as is the case for light propagation in anisotropic media, it follows necessarily that the deBroglie relations are no longer valid as written. In this paper the relations are generalized for such non‐parallel situations by defining a new wave vector l in the direction of energy transport and distinct from the propagation wave vector. The introduction of l follows the method by which deBroglie associated a wave with an electron. The magnitude of l is ω u/c2 where ω is the angular frequency and u the velocity of energy transport. The physical meaning of l is discussed including its interpretation as the wave vector for the photon wave function.
Abstract In 1925, de Broglie hypothesized that any material particle has an associated wave with /h p . Electron diffraction seems to support that Hypothesis. But then, the electron at rest will have infinite wavelength, and infinite wave phase velocity. This says that for a material particle, the de Broglie relation does not hold. Failed attempts to save the postulate, kept the flawed relation, and modified the waves into train waves, pilot waves, probability waves, … to name a few. We keep the de Broglie waves unchanged, and modify the relation. First, we observe that the Planck energy E h used by de Broglie defines virtual electromagnetic waves. Consequently, for any particle, the virtual electromagnetic wavelength is / /c h mc , and / /h m c . Refinement of de Broglie argument, indicates that /h mmay be x , Heisenberg’s uncertainty in the particle location. de Broglie’s later analysis supports this interpretation, and we offer an explanation to particle diffraction as a consequence of Heisenberg’s uncertainty. We apply / /h m c to obtain the dispersion relations for the de Broglie virtual waves.
The de Broglie relation is revisited in connection with an ab initio relativistic description of particles and waves, which is the same treatment that historically led to this famous relation. In the same context of the Minkowski four-vector formalism, we also discuss the phase and the group velocity of a matter wave, explicitly showing that both transform as ordinary velocities under a Lorentz transformation. We show that such a transformation rule is a necessary condition for the covariance of the de Broglie relation, and stress the pedagogical value of the Einstein-Minkowski-Lorentz relativistic context in the presentation of the de Broglie relation.
This chapter describes the dual nature of electron/de Broglie waves. de Broglie suggested that like light, an electron also behaves as both a particle and a wave. Based on this hypothesis, a relationship between wavelength of electrons (a particle) and momentum was developed. It opines that ‘wavelength of the particle is inversely proportional to momentum’. This is called the de Broglie relation. On the basis of the above facts, we have developed a relationship between wavelength and voltage applied and this relation may be stated as ‘the wavelength of a particle is inversely proportional to the square root of the voltage applied to the system’. This chapter also uses the Davisson and Germer experiment to show the wave nature of the particle, i.e., diffraction of electrons by crystal lattice. The experimental results were the same as found in the case of the diffraction of X-ray by crystals. This chapter also provides an idea on quantisation of angular momentum. It also discusses Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, phase velocity, group velocity, and uncertainty relation between energy and time. The chapter comprises the experimental evidence of Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, such as by diffraction of electrons through a slit and gamma ray microscope thought experiment, which is shows the physical significance of the uncertainty principle. Sufficient references, solved problems, and questions on concepts have been provided at the end of chapter.
The Lorentz transformation (LT) is explained by changes occurring in the wave characteristics of matter as it changes inertial frame. This explanation is akin to that favoured by Lorentz, but informed by later insights, due primarily to de Broglie, regarding the underlying unity of matter and radiation. To show the nature of these changes, a massive particle is modelled as a standing wave in three dimensions. As the particle moves, the standing wave becomes a travelling wave having two factors. One is a carrier wave displaying the dilated frequency and contracted ellipsoidal form described by the LT, while the other (identified as the de Broglie wave) is a modulation defining the dephasing of the carrier wave (and thus the failure of simultaneity) in the direction of travel. The superluminality of the de Broglie wave is thus explained, as are several other mysterious features of the optical behaviour of matter, including the physical meaning of the Schrödinger equation and the relevance to scattering processes of the de Broglie wave vector. Consideration is given to what this Lorentzian approach to relativity might mean for the possible existence of a preferred frame and the origin of the observed Minkowski metric.
Bohr's response in 1925 to the failure of the Bohr–Kramers–Slater theory was, as we have seen, to regard wave–particle duality as having a formal, rather than realistic, significance; he saw it as a ‘limitation of our usual means of visualization’. That same year, however, wave–particle duality was generalised by Louis-Victor de Broglie to cover the theory of matter. Moreover, the advent of quantum mechanics (i.e. matrix mechanics and wave mechanics), rather than dispelling the duality problem, heightened it. How did Bohr respond to these new developments in the quantum theory? A matter of waves In the autumn of 1923 de Broglie put forward the extremely bold hypothesis that any particle whatever is associated with a wave whose wavelength λ and frequency ν are proportional to the particle's momentum and energy respectively: λ = h / p , v = E / h . De Broglie regarded his hypothesis as the basis of a new mechanics, a wave mechanics related to classical mechanics in the same way as wave optics is related to ray optics. On this view the trajectory of a particle corresponds to the ray of the wave associated with it (i.e. the normal to the equiphase surface of the wave), and the velocity of the particle corresponds to the group velocity of the wave. De Broglie suggested, moreover, that in certain circumstances particles should exhibit diffraction effects: a stream of electrons, for example, which passes through a slit in a screen should undergo diffraction.