The problem of an incident beam of light traveling to the right in the x direction and reflecting/ refracting at an interface at x=0 may be solved using Maxwell’s electromagnetic equation for the electric field of a photon. In particular, mathematical continuity of the electric field and its first derivative, where the field is of the form Real( exp(ipx - iEt) ) with E energy being constant, but p allowed to change, may be used to establish relationships between weights of the incident, reflected and refracted electric fields. The modulus of each of these waves is then linked to intensity. The above continuity equation, however, is somewhat unusual if one thinks of a single quantum traveling in time. For instance, before it strikes it is an incident photon, but after (in time) it is either a reflected or refracted one. Thus probability naturally appears in the problem and if one performs the usual grouping by time, then the incident photon is one side and the reflected or refracted on the other. This is the opposite grouping used in the continuity approach so we ask: How may this be understood? On average a photon moves with a certain speed, but it also has a wavelength. We argued in (2) that for a particle with rest mass, there is no time within the wavelength region, but rather a probability to be at an x value is given by exp(ipx). In fact, the two dimensional nature of exp(ipx) accounts for the removal of time as one needs two “variables” or dimensions to describe the direction of motion. On average, however, the particle still moves as x=velocity time. If there is no time in the probabilistic approach within a wavelength, then even treating the particle as a point means that there is no clear separation in time of the incident, reflected and refracted rays. If one uses space as a marker (as in the time-independent Schrodinger approach to a bound quantum particle) then this spatial approach within a wavelength governs the solution to the problem. In such a case, one may write Aexp(ipx) + B exp(-ipx) = Cexp(i p2 x) and a similar conservation of momentum equation A p exp(ipx) -p B exp(-ipx) = Cp2 exp(ip2 x) rather than argue that the electric field and its derivative should be continuous at x=0. We use addition because there exists an OR situation, but we do not employ the usual grouping by time, but rather in space with this probability.On average, however, this approach must be consistent with AA/c1 = BB/c1 + CC/c2 where A*A etc are intensity values much like W*(x)W(x)=Probability(x) for a bound particle where W(x) is the wavefunction. Mathematically the above approach is the same as the continuity of the electric field and its first derivative, but we suggest that this view considers the role of time in the problem. The continuity approach allows for the incident, reflected and refracted photon to exist at the same time which only makes sense if time does not really exist within a wavelength, even though there is a mapping to x=vt. Thus both the loss of time and the idea of probability are needed and they complement each other.
The problem of an incident beam of light traveling to the right in the x direction and reflecting/ refracting at an interface at x=0 may be solved using Maxwell’s electromagnetic equation for the electric field of a photon. In particular, mathematical continuity of the electric field and its first derivative, where the field is of the form Real( exp(ipx - iEt) ) with E energy being constant, but p allowed to change, may be used to establish relationships between weights of the incident, reflected and refracted electric fields. The modulus of each of these waves is then linked to intensity. The above continuity equation, however, is somewhat unusual if one thinks of a single quantum traveling in time. For instance, before it strikes it is an incident photon, but after (in time) it is either a reflected or refracted one. Thus probability naturally appears in the problem and if one performs the usual grouping by time, then the incident photon is one side and the reflected or refracted on the other. This is the opposite grouping used in the continuity approach so we ask: How may this be understood? On average a photon moves with a certain speed, but it also has a wavelength. We argued in (2) that for a particle with rest mass, there is no time within the wavelength region, but rather a probability to be at an x value is given by exp(ipx). In fact, the two dimensional nature of exp(ipx) accounts for the removal of time as one needs two “variables” or dimensions to describe the direction of motion. On average, however, the particle still moves as x=velocity time. If there is no time in the probabilistic approach within a wavelength, then even treating the particle as a point means that there is no clear separation in time of the incident, reflected and refracted rays. If one uses space as a marker (as in the time-independent Schrodinger approach to a bound quantum particle) then this spatial approach within a wavelength governs the solution to the problem. In such a case, one may write Aexp(ipx) + B exp(-ipx) = Cexp(i p2 x) and a similar conservation of momentum equation A p exp(ipx) -p B exp(-ipx) = Cp2 exp(ip2 x) rather than argue that the electric field and its derivative should be continuous at x=0. We use addition because there exists an OR situation, but we do not employ the usual grouping by time, but rather in space with this probability.On average, however, this approach must be consistent with AA/c1 = BB/c1 + CC/c2 where AA etc are intensity values much like W(x)W(x)=Probability(x) for a bound particle where W(x) is the wavefunction. Mathematically the above approach is the same as the continuity of the electric field and its first derivative, but we suggest that this view considers the role of time in the problem. The continuity approach allows for the incident, reflected and refracted photon to exist at the same time which only makes sense if time does not really exist within a wavelength, even though there is a mapping to x=vt. Thus both the loss of time and the idea of probability are needed and they complement each other.
A one dimensional reflection/refraction problem is by nature probabilistic because an incident photon either reflects or refracts with certain unknown probabilities. The problem is traditionally solved by matching the electric field and its derivative with respect to x at x=0, t=0 where the electric field for a photon follows from Maxwell’s electromagnetic equations and is given by Eo cos(-wt+kx) where p=hbar k. As such, this problem is treated “classically” We argue, however, that this is a quantum mechanical problem (the photon being a quantum particle). Furthermore, no information is needed about the form of the electric field. Reflection/refraction conserves energy. It also occurs at some x point which may be varied i.e. there is translational invariance. A conservation of energy equation may be immediately written. The first medium has an index of refraction n1=1 and the second n2<n1. The conservation of energy equation is: AA/c1 = BB/c1 + CC/c2 where AA, BB and CC are the incident, reflected and refracted intensities = energy per photon * speed * number of photons. AA etc. is written to show that the intensity is explicitly positive. If one considers A known, then B and C are two unknowns, but there is only one equation. Thus energy conservation is not the full reality or information of the problem. This problem may be mathematically solved by using a difference of squares which leads to two equations: (A+B) = C and p1 (A-B) = p2 C. These may be solved for B,C in terms of A. This, however, is not the most general solution in that it does not show invariance of x i.e. the point at which the index of refraction changes. In this note we investigate the consequences of including x in the solution and argue this leads to a kind of square-root probability function which together with its first derivative should be continuous at any x chosen to be the interface of the media. This leads to a solution of Aexp(ipx), instead of A (etc), which is the free particle wavefunction. Thus this wavefunction (or unusual probability) is a direct consequence of the spatial invariance in the problem, but ensures that no x dependence appears if one combines the two square-root probability equations to create an energy conservation equation which has nothing to do with x.
Newtonian mechanics deals with smoothness in time and space through x(t) where the “details” occur within dx and dt which tend to zero. Thus there are no discontinuities in x and t. We have argued that the quantum free particle wavefunction pieces exp(-iEt) and exp(ipx) deal with discontinuities and that smoothness is due to a “modulus” of two dimensional probability e.g. exp(ipx)exp(-ipx) which yields 1 or determinism. Both exp(-iEt) and exp(ipx) contain finite measures in time and space, namely hbar/E and hbar/p and so there may be discontinuities. For example, exp(ipx) contains probability cos(px) and sin(px) within a wavelength so x=vt is only an average type of motion. Thus using exp(ipx) in a problem may result in time discontinuities because the particle is not moving as x=vt within a wavelength. In Part I we examined one-dimensional reflection/refraction of light from an interface of two media with n1=1 and n2>n1. We concluded that the quantum solution of this problem involves two equations, one linked to probabilities and the other to impulse. Multiplying the two equations together (with a special grouping, namely a spatial grouping) yields a single equation which may either be interpreted as a pressure balance equation. Thus one starts with two equations which are both grouped in time, but with the second demonstrating vector directions and obtain a single equation which is only grouped in space (which is linked with spatial grouping). By rearranging this equation, one may obtain a time grouping i.e. energy conservation equation, but the two groupings cannot exist together. This is the problem with the classical pressure picture linked to a steady state scenario and not a single photon process which displays a discontinuity in time i.e. a single photon may either reflect or refract. In this note we try to consider why classical energy conservation/ pressure balance only leads to one equation, while the quantum mechanical approach leads to the two required equations at the price of introducing a square root flux type of probability. We argue that there seem to be two factors. First there is the notion of scalars and vectors and a space versus time picture. The single conservation of energy equation AA/c1 = BB/c1 + CC/c2 where AA,BB,CCC represent the incident, reflected and refracted beams is expressed in terms of time and so vector information (i.e. -p for the reflected beam is not conveyed). If one rewrites this as AA/c1 -BB/c1 = CC/c2 then one obtains a pressure balance type of equation, but time is removed and one is grouping by space. The second and more important feature we argue is time discontinuity. If one considers a single photon, it may reflect or refract, but not both. Thus there is a time period in which to observe both reflection and refraction and more than one incident photon is needed. Newtonian mechanics in the form of steady state treats time as smooth and so everything must happen instantaneously. This is the idea behind pressure. One considers an impulse 2p multiplied by flux i.e. velocity. The flux is used to find the number of particles which strike a surface per second as if this were a continuous smooth process in time. For the case of reflection/refraction it is not. It is discontinuous because either a reflected ro a refracted photon is created each time. Thus the notion of pressure averages this over and loses some of the information in the problem. This, we argue, is why a pressure balance/ energy conservation equation is not sufficient to solve the reflection/refraction problem even though pressure is a physical concept and may be measured (on average) just as x=vt may be measured on average.
Note: Dec. 28, 2022 The form exp(-iEt)exp(ipx) for both the photon and a particle with rest mass may be obtained from the Lorentz in variant -Et+px=A by noting that -id/dx A = p and that exp(ipx) is an eigenfunction of exp(ipx). In a series of notes we have considered the problem of light moving in the positive x direction hitting a medium along the y axis at x=0 and reflecting and refracting. We assumed that light is of the form of a photon which has an energy E which is the same in the incident, reflected and refracted beams. We also considered the notion of a steady state stream. Given a single photon in the incident beam, it has a probability a to reflect and 1-a to refract. As discussed in previous notes, one may consider an intensity AA, BB, CC for the incident, reflected and refracted rays (AA>0 etc) and write energy conservation as: AA/c1 = BB/c1 + CC/c2 where c1 is the speed of light in medium 1 and c2 in medium 2. We noted that the energy conservation equation has two unknowns B,C if A is known, but may be broken into two equations if one considers time removed from the problem (i.e steady state) and one groups by space i.e. (AA/c1 -BB/c1) = CC/c2 i.e. A+B=C and A/c1 -B/c1=C/c2. One may note that one does not have a conservation of flux/intensity equation, but that flux/intenisty which physically exists is directly linked to energy conservation. One may also note that one does not have an equation of energy flux conservation. In this note, we consider the dispersion relationship of light E=pc and the notion of a continuity equation which applies to the “square root” probabilities. We consider exp(-iEt+ipx) as the simplest solution, other than a constant and speculate whether exp(ipx) for a steady state picture represents a kind of square root flux. The idea of a square root flux suggests two sets of equations with square root fluxes which may be multiplied to create a flux equation. exp(ipx) has a kind of wavelike structure with two dimensions and may interfere. It also maps to a constant flux through exp(-ipx)exp(ipx). We consider these ideas and conclude that the wavefunction is like a square root flux which helps to associate a picture with the idea of it being a dynamical probability. This is helpful when considering a W(r vector) not equal to W(r) i.e. not spherically symmetric. This suggests unbalanced flux and rotation. In quantum mechanics, one does not have a container and so the fluxes create a static-appearing density in the bound case.
It is known that a single photon moving in the x direction and encountering an n1-n2 index of refraction discontinuity at xo will either reflect or refract, with the probabilities for each summing to 1. This problem, however, is solved using a balance of Aexp(ipx)+Bexp(-ipx) = Cexp(ip2 x) at xo and the derivative d/dx, of this equation. The complex conjugate of one equation multiplied by the second yields: AA/c = BB/c + CC/c2 where E=pc and E is constant for the incident, reflected and refracted photon. The two continuity equations apply even in the case of a single photon, but in such a case one has either an incident photon changing to a reflected one or an incident to a refracted one. One never has all three together as in thte two continuity equations. We ask: How is it possible to include both a refracted and reflected photon together with the incident in the same equation? We suggest here that the form exp(ipx) applies to momentum, whether it is part of a particle or part of a potential field. exp(ipx) may be obtained from maximization of entropy -P(x)ln(P(x)) subject to the periodic constraint ipxP(x). We suggest that in a single photon interaction, one has momentum in media n1 and n2 and these allow for the continuity equation with the system interactions taking the place of a photon to create the balance. There is stochasticity in that a single photon either becomes a reflected or refracted one, but exp(ipx) does not simply apply to the photon. it may be applied to the n1-n2 interface momentum which is created during the interaction. This interaction is consistent with the a steady stream picture only involving photons . Thus for a single photon, it appears as if one has an entangled probability exp(ipx)’s for the incident, reflected and refracted photons, but actually the physical photon only plays a role as first an incident one and then either a reflected or refracted one with the n1-n2 interface momentum creating the missing exp(ipx) piece needed for the continuity balance. Ultimately, A,B and C become probabilities AA/c,= 1, BB/c = P(reflected) and CC/c2= P(refracted), but these are not obtained by maximizing entropy subject to a constraint.as one does not have independence of probabilities.We note that the two continuity equations combine to create a pressure balance which one wishes to have physically in the problem. The photon reflection-refraction problem may be reformulated for a particle with rest mass using a particle with E, p in a constant potential V1 reaching a V1-V2 (both constant) interface at xo with E remaining constant.
Quantum mechanics is known for its “square root” probability i.e. the existence of a wavefunction W(x) such that P(x) = W*(x)W(x). This begs the question: Why is this the case? In Maxwell’s electromagnetic theory of the photon, a similar situation arises except that one has energy density instead of P(x) which consists of .5C1 Electric field* Electric field + .5c2 Magnetic field*Magnetic field. The “square root” object is a physical observable (Electric field, Magnetic field) which both behave as cos(-Et+px) and so, more accessible than W(x). Alternatively one may use Fermat’s least time principle for light to show that i two dimensional problems (reflection/refraction) d/dx (used in extremization) is really the operator of momentum in that direction i.e. a spatial invariant direction. Thus A=px such that dA/dx=p = x component of momentum which may be generalized to A=-Et+p dot r. (p.r) may be written as -i ln(exp(ip dot r) with exp(i p dot r) representing a “kind of probability”. This probability may be considered a square root probability because for uniform motion (light) all x points along a ray should have equal probability. Thus exp(i p dot r) maps into a constant which happens if one takes the modulus. Both of the above approaches (using continuity at x or a kind of conservation of probability and a momentum) may be used to solve the problem of an incident beam of light moving in the positive x direction hitting a medium and both reflecting and refracting. For example see (1). The goal is to find the two intensity values associated with the reflected and refracted beams assuming the incident intensity is known. In this note, we take a different approach to finding the two unknowns, one that does not use the idea of the electric field proportional to cos(-Et+px) or the probability exp(ipx). We wish to solve the problem using only the idea of information and stress the importance of beginning with energy conservation a priori unlike the two approaches listed above. We postulate that there are two sets of information in this problem. First there is the notion of Energy = p(momentum in a vacuum) n c/n where n is the index of refraction. Thus the incident and reflected light are associated with pc1,c1 and the refracted with pc2, c2 with energy being the same for all. Second there is the idea of conservation of energy i.e. if ten photons with energy E hit the surface and a10 reflect and (1-a)10 refract, then the sum of the refracted and reflected energy equals the initial energy. Energy is then equated with intensity through Intensity/c = energy (1). Using only these two pieces of information we argue one should be able to find the intensity of both the reflected and refracted ray. This leads to an immediate problem because there are two unknowns and only one equation, namely conservation of energy i.e. I(A)/c1 = I(B)/c1 + I(C)/c2 where A is the incident beam, B the reflected and C the refracted. Writing as: I(A)/c1 - I(B)/c1 = I(C)/c2 (i.e. a spatial instead of time grouping) suggests a possible solution might be to employ a difference of squares noting that 1/c = p/E with E being a constant in the problem. Thus one may reduce the problem to A+B=C and p1A-p1B=p2C. This is of the form of a new kind of “square root” type probability, but leads to two equations with two unknowns (A is assumed to be known) which allows the problem to be solved.
In Part I we considered light moving in the positive x direction stiking a medium with a different index of refraction with some reflecting and the rest refracting. We argued one may immediately write a conservation of energy equation, but this is a single equation while there are two unknowns, the intensity of the reflected beam and the refracted, assuming the incident intensity is known. (We also argued that one also has the relation E=pc for a photon, but this is not needed to solve for the two intensities.) Our main point was that instead of seeking another independent equation (containing new information), one may write the conservation of energy equation as a product of two equations A+ B=C ((1a)) and A/c1 -B/c1 = C/c2 ((1b)) where AA/c1 = BB/c1 + CC/c2 is the energy conservation equation. Thus energy conservation contains all of the information needed, but one must move to a square root of probability picture in order to obtain the two equations needed to solve for the reflected and refracted values B,C and then the intensities BB and CC. In Part I, we noted that the reflection/refraction problem may be presented as a steady state one in which the scenario is not changing in time. A Maxwell-Boltzmann gas in equilibrium also does not change in time, but here there is a difference, namely a lack of time reversal invariance. In other words there is a distinct direction of motion i.e. the incident and refracted beams move in the positive direction only and the reflected in the negative x. The problem, however, is also a probabilistic one because given a single photon, it either reflects or refracts with certain probabilities. Thus we suggest there exists in this physical steady state problem a dynamic or directional probability. This probability is related to space and may be positive or negative unlike the usual time probabilities linked to events i.e. classical probability theory. The conservation of energy equation is a classical probability one, but dynamic motion probabilities are present in the problem and should also be manifest in equations. In fact the two dynamic probability equations allow for the solving of the reflected/refracted intensities (probabilities), but are also directly linked to the conservation of energy equation which may be written as: AA/c1 -BB/c1 = CC/c2 which points towards flow in two different directions. Thus we argue that a dynamic directional probability is responsible for the decomposition of the energy conservation equation into two dynamic probability ones.