The two opposite concepts - multiphoton and effective photon - readily describing the photoelectric effect under strong irradiation in the case that the energy of the incident light is essentially smaller than the ionisation potential of gas atoms and the work function of the metal are treated. Based on the submicroscopic construction of quantum mechanics developed in the previous papers by the author [Phys. Essays vol. 6, 554 (1993); vol. 10, 407 (1997)] the analysis of the reasons of the two concepts discrepancies is led. Taking into account the main hypothesis of those works, i.e., that the electron is an extended object that is not point-like, the study of the interaction between the electron and a photon flux is carried out in detail. A comparison with numerous experiments is performed.
The two opposite concepts - multiphoton and effective photon - readily describing the photoelectric effect under strong irradiation in the case that the energy of the incident light is essentially smaller than the ionisation potential of gas atoms and the work function of the metal are treated. Based on the submicroscopic construction of quantum mechanics developed in the previous papers by the author [Phys. Essays vol. 6, 554 (1993); vol. 10, 407 (1997)] the analysis of the reasons of the two concepts discrepancies is led. Taking into account the main hypothesis of those works, i.e., that the electron is an extended object that is not point-like, the study of the interaction between the electron and a photon flux is carried out in detail. A comparison with numerous experiments is performed.
The critical and correct scientific analysis of the generally accepted theory of the external photoelectric effect is proposed. The methodological basis for the analysis is the unity of formal logic and of rational dialectics. It is shown that Einstein’s formulation of the law of the photoelectric effect is not free from the following objection. The terms of Einstein’s formula characterize the quantitative determinacy (i.e., energy) which belongs and is related to the different material objects: “photon”, “electron in metal”, and “electron not in metal”. This signifies that Einstein’s formula represents violation of the formal-logical laws of identity and absence (lack) of contradiction. The correct mathematical formulation of the law of the external photoelectric effect within the framework of the system approach is proposed. The correct formulation represents the proportion by relative increments of the energy of the incident photon and the energy of the emitted electron. The proportion describes the linear relationship between the energy of the incident photon and the energy of the emitted electron.
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.
According to an entropy approach and by reviewing the similarity between laws characterizing the flow of heat and electric charges, electric charges were defined as electromagnetic waves that possess an electrical potential or simply as ionized photons. Accordingly, the flow of electrons was defined as a simultaneous flow of particulate energy and wave energy. Such definitions led to clear the confusions of duality properties of electrons and light waves, conflicts in the SI system of units and to explain the difference between the calculated drift speed of electrons and the speed of electricity or charges in conductors. However, Einstein considered the electron to be a negative charge of unknown nature during his analysis of the photoelectric effect. Einstein presented his hypothesis that light may behave as a particle to find a plausible explanation of the photoelectric effect. He found the measured cutoff frequency of light below which light might not eject electrons from metal-surfaces in photocells regardless of how much light is shone on the surface as a proof of truth of his hypothesis. Such frequency may be explained also, according to the previously introduced definitions, as the minimum energy quanta that may gain a quantized potential in photocells. This explanation may find plausible explanations of the found measurements of the photoelectric effects for different metal surfaces, stopping voltages into photocells and the photoelectric effect of X-rays. Einstein’s hypothesis of the photoelectric effect failed to find plausible explanations of such measurement results. According to the principles of conservation of momentum, there is a minimum quantity of photons that may lead to bouncing an atomic electron out of its orbit. So, considering Einstein’s theory as a perfect hypothesis that explains the photoelectric effect may be a misconception.
Based on the photon topological origin system established in the publicly archived general outline literature (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20845911) and the model framework of the previous two papers in this series (Quantum Transition, Quantum Tunneling), this paper constructs the microscopic mechanism of the photoelectric effect entirely within the three-dimensional physical framework. The photoelectric effect is not a particle process of photons "hitting" electrons, but a process of energy coupling and topological dissociation between continuous light waves and the figure-eight topological closed-loop structures of electrons at metal surfaces. Light waves arrive at the metal surface as continuous wave fields and resonantly couple with the electron's figure-eight closed-loop standing waves. Only when the light wave frequency satisfies the resonance condition of the closed-loop standing wave can the integral unit of energy be absorbed, increasing the electron's superposed amplitude to the emission threshold. When the superposed amplitude reaches the energy threshold corresponding to the work function, the topological closed loop partially dissociates, and the electron escapes the metal surface binding. This paper continues the "base amplitude and superposed amplitude" framework from the previous papers: electrons change only their superposed amplitude and equivalent energy upon absorbing light wave energy; the closed-loop ontology remains intact before emission. After emission, electrons continue to move as free particles. This model provides a complete physical interpretation of the photoelectric effect from the perspective of internal topological structure, without introducing particle models of "photon-electron collisions" or abstract probability interpretations. 中文摘要 本文依托已公开存档的体系总纲文献(DOI:10.5281/zenodo.20845911)所建立的光子拓扑本源体系,以及系列专题前两篇(量子跃迁、量子隧穿)的模型设定,在纯三维物理框架内构建光电效应的微观机制。 光电效应不是光波"撞击"电子的粒子过程,而是连续光波与金属表面电子八字扭结闭环之间的能量耦合与拓扑解离过程。光波以连续波动场的形式抵达金属表面,与电子八字扭结闭环驻波发生共振耦合;只有当光波频率满足闭环驻波的共振条件时,整份能量才能被吸收,使电子叠加振幅增大至逸出阈值;当叠加振幅达到逸出功对应的能量阈值后,电子拓扑闭环发生部分解离,脱离金属表面束缚。 本文延续前两篇的"基底振幅与叠加振幅"二分框架:电子吸收光波能量后仅改变叠加振幅与等效能量,闭环本体结构在逸出前保持完整;逸出后电子以自由行波形态继续运动。全程采用三维直观物理图像,不引入"光波-电子碰撞"的粒子模型或抽象概率诠释,从电子内部拓扑结构层面给出光电效应的完整物理解释。 关键词: 光电效应;八字扭结;驻波;共振吸收;逸出功;拓扑解离;连续光波
Startling findings concerning the Planck‟s quantum equation, E = hv, have been brought to light in this work. It has been conclusively proven that the conceptual correctness of this quantum equation cannot be justified by any physical reasoning, and that there have emerged a newly formulated but promising quantum equation, P = bv, which relates the power „P‟ of a quantum oscillator, such as a photon, with its frequency „v‟ (where ‘b’is the elementary quantum of energy observable in nature), to be the right kind of quantum equation. Since the core concept in the Einstein‟s theory of the photoelectric effect is critically dependent on the correctness of the Planck‟s quantum equation, bringing about an appropriate modification in the Einstein‟s derivation of the photoelectric effect has been deemed essential. Reformulation of the Einstein‟s photoelectric equation has been carried out in this work taking into consideration the newly emerged quantum perspective as well as the concept of energy-power dichotomy that photons and photoelectrons do exhibit. Thus, the Einstein‟s photoelectric equation expressed in all energy terms, Ee = hv h v0, is get converted into all power terms, Pe = bv bv0. This modified form of the Einstein‟s photoelectric equation has been found to be capable of providing satisfactory explanation to all the salient features the photoelectric effect exhibits.
In 1905, Albert Einstein showed that the photoelectric effect could be explained by the hypothesis that the energy of a light beam was distributed in discrete bundles, later known as photons. Photon-counting experiments provide a fairly direct measurement of the photon probability distribution for all kinds of light embraced by the quantum theory. The field of quantum optics occupies a central position involving the interaction of atoms with the electromagnetic field. Young's experiment is one example of a phenomenon that can be explained by both classical and quantum theory. In Young's experiment, each photon must be capable of interfering with itself in such a way that its probability of striking the second screen at a particular point is proportional to the calculated intensity at that point. Multiphoton transitions are found whenever electrons bound in atoms or molecules interact with sufficiently intense electromagnetic radiation.