Quantum theory was not originally developed for the sake of \ninterpreting photoelectric phenomena. It was solely a theory \nas to the mechanism of absorption and emission of electromagnetic \nwaves by resonators of atomic or subatomic dimensions. It had nothing \nwhatever to say about the energy of an escaping electron or about the \nconditions under which such an electron could make its escape, and up \nto this day the form of the theory developed by its author has not been \nable to account satisfactorily for the photoelectric facts presented herewith. \nWe are confronted, however, by the astonishing situation that \nthese facts were correctly and exactly predicted nine years ago by a form \nof quantum theory which has now been pretty generally abandoned.
Quantum theory was not originally developed for the sake of \ninterpreting photoelectric phenomena. It was solely a theory \nas to the mechanism of absorption and emission of electromagnetic \nwaves by resonators of atomic or subatomic dimensions. It had nothing \nwhatever to say about the energy of an escaping electron or about the \nconditions under which such an electron could make its escape, and up \nto this day the form of the theory developed by its author has not been \nable to account satisfactorily for the photoelectric facts presented herewith. \nWe are confronted, however, by the astonishing situation that \nthese facts were correctly and exactly predicted nine years ago by a form \nof quantum theory which has now been pretty generally abandoned.
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.
Most textbooks say that quantum mechanics came into being when Max Planck, in a desperate attempt to construct a theory that explained experimental data, explored the radical idea of energy being radiated or absorbed by all bodies in discrete packets (or quanta). The energy content of a quantum of radiation is proportional to the frequency of the radiation emitted or absorbed, as in , and the proportionality constant bears the name of Planck. Planck himself was rather uncomfortable with the idea of energy packets, and spent a considerable amount of time in later years trying to “restore” the classical picture of continuous energy exchange between bodies and surroundings. However, in 1905 Einstein was able to use the idea of the quantum to explain the mechanism of the photoelectric effect, which cannot be explained in any other way! This established the reality of the quantum and so, it may be said that Einstein, rather than Planck, is the father of quantum mechanics. Within a few years, Neils Bohr constructed his model of the hydrogen atom in which the electron can only occupy certain special orbits around the nucleus, and any jump between these orbits is accompanied by energy being absorbed or emitted in the form of quanta. The nearly exact agreement of Bohr’s predictions based on the model and observed hydrogen atomic spectra was among the first impressive accomplishments of quantum mechanics.
When a theory is framed trying to explain a discrepant system of facts, it is a necessary process of thought to take some branch of the theory as more completely true than the rest, and to adjust the remaining parts in such a way that they will fit in with this base, though they may still conflict with one another. This has certainly been true of the quantum theory; the speculations connected with it have as their base the law of the conservation of energy. Now a critical examination of fundamentals does not by any means justify this faith. It is of course a fact of observation that in the gross energy is conserved, but this only means an averaged energy; and as pure dynamics has failed to explain many atomic phenomena there seems no reason to maintain the exact conservation of energy, which is only one of the consequences of the dynamical equations. Indeed it is hardly too much to say that had the photoelectric effect been discovered a century ago, it is probable that no one would ever have suggested that the status of the first law of thermodynamics was in any way different from that of the second. On the other hand, Bohr's theory, and especially Sommerfeld's extension of it, have given great encouragement to the belief that in dynamics lay the way to the complete truth, so that in consequence of the triumphs of that theory there has been little thought in other directions. Another impediment is that our whole ideas are saturated with the principles of energy, so that denying it leaves hardly any foundation from which to start.
Einstein’s 1905 paper on the photoelectric effect, in which he considered Planck’s idea of quanta of energy to be a universal characteristic of light, marks the beginning of quantum theory. For over ten years Einstein stood alone on the issue of energy quantization of light; and although in 1915 experimental conrmation of his photoelectric effect came from painstaking experiments performed by Millikan, acceptance of the idea that light was composed of particles was far from universal. Millikan himself wrote in 1915: “Despite … the apparent complete success of the Einstein equation, the physical theory of which it was designed to be the symbolic expression is found so untenable that Einstein himself, I believe, no longer holds to it.” Einstein did hold to it. It was only in the mid 1920s, when Heisenberg, Schrödinger, Dirac, and others developed the rst forms of quantum theory, that serious discussions concerning the particle nature of light and the meaning of the new theory began. Discussions about the meaning of quantum theory continue today.
[M]odern physics has definitely decided in favor of Plato. In fact the smallest units of matter are not physical objects in the ordinary sense; they are forms, ideas which can be expressed unambiguously only in mathematical language. Werner Heisenberg Basic framework Prerequisites: Appendix C, §1B(ii). Near the beginning of the twentieth century, physicists realized that electromagnetic waves sometimes exhibited particle-like properties, as if light were composed of discrete ‘photons’. In 1923, Louis de Broglie proposed that, conversely, particles of matter might have wave-like properties. This was confirmed in 1927 by C. J. Davisson and L. H. Germer and, independently, by G. P. Thompson, who showed that an electron beam exhibited an unmistakable diffraction pattern when scattered off a metal plate, as if the beam were composed of ‘electron waves’. Systems with many interacting particles exhibit even more curious phenomena. Quantum mechanics is a theory which explains these phenomena. We will not attempt here to provide a physical justification for quantum mechanics. Historically, quantum theory developed through a combination of vaguely implausible physical analogies and wild guesses motivated by inexplicable empirical phenomena. By now, these analogies and guesses have been overwhelmingly vindicated by experimental evidence. The best justification for quantum mechanics is that it ‘works’, by which we mean that its theoretical predictions match all available empirical data with astonishing accuracy.
The behavior of light and its interaction with matter is certainly one of the most interesting phenomena of physics. It has puzzled thinkers and scientists in ancient Greece (Archimedes) and through the Middle Ages, at least since the times of Robert Grosseteste (1168–1235), right up to the theories of Galileo Galilei and Isaac Newton. The classical electromagnetic theory of light (see Tab. 13.1) was beautifully established in the second half of the nineteenth century with the Maxwell equations. Quantum optics is nothing other than the quantum theory of light. It finds its roots in Planck's discovery (1900) that the assumption of energy quantization for a harmonic oscillator allowed us to solve the black-body problem (see Subsec. 1.5.1). The successive early steps that led to the quantization of the electromagnetic field include Einstein's explanation of the photoelectric effect with the introduction of the quantum of light (see Subsec. 1.2.1) and the interpretation of atomic spectra (see Subsec. 1.5.4). Quantum optics is usually not covered by conventional textbooks on quantum mechanics. We include its discussion here for two main reasons: first, because it is a fundamental and advanced application of the basic framework of quantum mechanics, and, second, because in the last 30 years quantum optics has played (and is still playing) a major role in the advancement and understanding of quantum mechanics.