Problem about application of E = hv to white light

Zynoakib
Messages
70
Reaction score
0
The reason why we see white light is because we see all the light in the visible lights spectrum.

So let's say I have a light bulb that gives out white light, the reason why it gives out light its because it keeps emitting a constant amount of energy. By E = hv, we should only be able to see one kind of light. ( for instance, the energy emitted by light is 100 J and the frequency of the light wave should be 100/h, which means one kind of light) So why can we still see white light?

What is wrong with my concept? Thanks a lot!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Zynoakib said:
By E = hv, we should only be able to see one kind of light. ( for instance, the energy emitted by light is 100 J and the frequency of the light wave should be 100/h, which means one kind of light) So why can we still see white light?

You logic for that conclusion escapes me.

The reason we see white light is we have receptors for many different photon energies and when they are all present we perceive that as white.

Thanks
Bill
 
A 100 watt light bulb radiates 100 Joules per second in a wide range of frequencies, only some of which are in the visible part of the spectrum. So in 1 second 100 Joules of photons are emitted in many colors. E=hv gives the energy of just *one* photon, and v=E/h its color. Since, there is no such thing as a white photon you cannot use use v = E/h this way. Using the formula for v with E = 100 Joules would only make sense, for example, if the 100 watt bulb radiated just one 100 Joule photon per second. And that would not be white light!
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
James_Harford said:
Using the formula for v with E = 100 Joules would only make sense, for example, if the 100 watt bulb radiated just one 100 Joule photon per second. And that would not be white light!

This made me laugh :-P I mean, it's true of course, but my God is it an understatement.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and James_Harford
We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following; https://www.cambridge.org/engage/api-gateway/coe/assets/orp/resource/item/66a6a6005101a2ffa86cdd48/original/a-derivation-of-maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf 'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s...
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...
Back
Top