I Feynman's QED; 36,000 revolutions per inch for red light.

anorlunda
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Messages
11,326
Reaction score
8,750
In Feynman's book, QED, The Strange Theory of Light and Matter, page 27 he says, "As long as the photon moves, the stopwatch hand turns (about 36,000 times per inch for red light); when the photon end up at the photomultiplier, we stop the watch."

I've been puzzling about the significance of 36,000. The wavelength of red light is about 1/36000 inches (700 nm). So it sounds like he is saying that the angle of the "little arrows" is the same as the phase angle of the EM oscillations in the photon. But my reading of the book is that the angle of the arrows refers to probability amplitudes of virtual photons, not the phase angle of a real photon. Feynman did not elaborate.

So I'm left confused. What is the significance of 36,000? Hopefully, an I-level answer is possible.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
anorlunda said:
I've been puzzling about the significance of 36,000. The wavelength of red light is about 1/36000 inches (700 nm). So it sounds like he is saying that the angle of the "little arrows" is the same as the phase angle of the EM oscillations in the photon. But my reading of the book is that the angle of the arrows refers to probability amplitudes of virtual photons, not the phase angle of a real photon. Feynman did not elaborate.
In Feynman's heuristic model it's both. If we take the double-slit, for example. The QED model must largely match the classical EM wave model. The phase of the probability amplitude must match the frequency/wavelength of the classical wave.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes hutchphd, topsquark, berkeman and 1 other person
I read Hanbury Brown and Twiss's experiment is using one beam but split into two to test their correlation. It said the traditional correlation test were using two beams........ This confused me, sorry. All the correlation tests I learnt such as Stern-Gerlash are using one beam? (Sorry if I am wrong) I was also told traditional interferometers are concerning about amplitude but Hanbury Brown and Twiss were concerning about intensity? Isn't the square of amplitude is the intensity? Please...
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Back
Top