4 ms·
Thx! So here are my next questions :) (I know nothing about physics etc... - I'm just a simple IT-employee) > "Yes, the target object gains velocity due to co
by zepearl 8y ago
Thx!
So here are my next questions :) (I know nothing about physics etc... - I'm just a simple IT-employee)
> "Yes, the target object gains velocity due to conservation of momentum. The photon goes from momentum p to -p, so the target object needs to gain 2p of momentum to balance it out."
1) If the target object gains velocity, then the photon slows down? Meaning: a) are there then slow and fast photons and b) is the speed-of-light constant of ~300KM/s in vacuum valid only for not-sped-down-photons?
2) Then if I would put in orbit a bunch of mirrors and make them all reflect the sun's light to point to a fixed object, that fixed object would start moving because of the photons hitting it? (forgetting any other factor that does not have something to do with photons)
> For perfect reflection, no. What you're referring to is light absorption, which is a different effect that raises the temperature of the target object and red-shifts the incoming photon.
So, ignoring "perfect reflection", some photons will be reflected, some will be absorbed, which will raise the temp of the target object?
> Pretty much. Photons are usually described by their momentum and energy.
So, a remix of the original question, haha: if we say that a photon has no mass, but at the same time we say that momentum needs mass, then if we say that a photon has momentum we're screwed, no?
- typothrowaway 8y ago1) A photon's momentum is related to its wavelength, not it's speed. They all have the same speed in a vacuum. 2) Sure. > So, a remix of the original question, haha: if we say that a photon has no mass, but at the same time we say that momentum needs mass, then if we say that a photon has momentum we're screwed, no? We would be screwed, but momentum doesn't need mass.
- zepearl 8y ago1) So, the wavelength is basically its "energy"? 2) Therefore "momentum" needs only "energy" and velocity instead of "mass" and velocity?
- typothrowaway 8y agoSort of, yes. It's hard to put reasons and interpretations behind all this, because in the end we just use formulas and numbers and check them in experiments. It's usually simpler that way. Be aware that a longer wavelength means a lower energy. Frequency is proportional to energy, which is inversely proportional to wavelength.
- vbezhenar 8y agoCan we kill photon by increasing its wavelength too much? Like put him between two mirrors so they would eat its energy multiple times (without absorbing)?
- typothrowaway 8y agoNo, as far as I know, there is no limit to a photon's wavelength, so it will just keep on stretching.