1

On diagrams showing light passing through a hole, the wave of light appears to change direction when it emerges from the hole.

What causes that change of direction? Is it maybe the walls of the hole imparting a pulling force or the sudden absence of light next to the emerging beam causes the light to spread?

Or maybe light does this all the time and we only notice when we put a wall with a hole in the way.

Please explain this to like I'm a five year old.

Qmechanic
  • 201,751
billpg
  • 826

4 Answers4

1

It might be useful to first ask a different question. Namely, why does light not scatter (change direction) when passing through a bulk medium such as glass (assuming no impurities, etc.)? One answer is the Ewald-Oseen extinction theorem which gives a rigorous mathematical account of how light propagates through matter. The atoms in a material absorb the incident light and then re-radiate it in different directions. The extinction theorem guarantees that the light radiated by the atoms will interfere with the incident beam in such a way that the light continues through the medium without changing direction. What happens, then, if a hole is carved out of that medium? The atoms on the edge of the hole are free to radiate light in all directions without this cancellation effect taking place.

One might also ask why atoms do not radiate light in all directions in the case of specular reflection (i.e. reflection off of a smooth surface). Again, the extinction theorem shines light on this issue because Snell's law and the law of reflection are derived from it.

0

Light is a wave , at the edge of the hole the oscillation spreads in all directions but the highest intensity is forward.

trula
  • 6,146
  • Thanks for the answer, but what causes the spread? – billpg Aug 20 '22 at 18:49
  • if you have an oscillation on one point you get a wave all around the point. You can experience it if you move a stick or your finger up and down in water you see a circular wave. The oscillation at the rand points of the hole make such a circular wave do it "spreads" – trula Aug 21 '22 at 17:49
0

Light is wave in the electromagnetic field and obeys a wave equation (3D) similar to a wave in a taut string (1D) or on a drum membrane (2D). You may imagine a "tension" whenever the field varies from place to place. This is simply a fundamental property of the EM field that occurs in the absence of any matter or charge. $$\frac{d^2u}{dt^2}=\nabla^2u,$$ where $u$ is any of the 6 components of the EM field (note that there are further constraints between the components). $\nabla^2u$ measures how much $u$ at a given point is bigger/smaller than $u$ at nearby points. $\frac{d^2u}{dt^2}$ relates that to how $u$ changes in time.

In the interior of a light beam, the EM field only varies in the direction of propagation, so the motion only occurs in that direction. At the edges of a finite beam, the field is strong towards the inside and weak on the outside, so the light leaks out of the beam. This is diffraction. A hole in a wall is an easy way to create a finite beam, but in the end the spreading happens afterwards and is a property of the light itself. E.g. if you could somehow create a finite segment of a plane EM wave just in empty space, it would still diffract as if it had just passed through an aperture.

You can also consider disturbances in the EM field as always "flowing" in all directions. In the interior of a light beam, the flows perpendicular to the propagation direction cancel out, since in each such plane the field is constant, while the flows along the propagation actually do something. But at the edges, the natural flow of light from the inside to the outside is not balanced, so we have diffraction. (This point of view is the Huygens-Fresnel principle.)

So no, the atoms/material of the wall have nothing to do with diffraction (no "pulling") outside of the act of destroying some of the light. Light knows how to diffract all on its own.

HTNW
  • 4,113
  • You could not be more incorrect. The beam spread is only started after it has interacted with an aperture .... the beam spread you talk about was caused the initial deviation. – PhysicsDave Aug 22 '22 at 03:31
  • @PhysicsDave Any finite beam spreads. The aperture causes the beam to be finite. It is not helpful to think it directly causes the beam to spread. I don't know what you are trying to say by "initial deviation." Diffraction is a property of light; no matter how light got into a certain shape, it will diffract according to that shape and no other history. – HTNW Aug 22 '22 at 15:53
  • The aperture causes the beam to be finite AND have initial spread angle! The spread angle will not change until another aperture is encountered. The beam is NOT spreading due to internal forces of light ... photons to not exert forces on each other. All the forces on the photons happened at the aperture. – PhysicsDave Aug 22 '22 at 16:24
  • @PhysicsDave Photons don't exist in classical theory, and in quantum theory there is no notion of applying forces to photons. The definition of direction for light (i.e. via a Fourier transform of the spatial field distribution) is inspired by the way the wave equation I've written behaves. That the directionality of a truncated light beam is more spread out than for a wider one is a direct result of the properties of light. I.e. beam width and spread angle are not independent. The spread angle is exactly determined by the spatial distribution only. This is directly from Maxwell's laws. – HTNW Aug 22 '22 at 17:46
  • You have taken a mishmash of things you have read/studied over the years and unfortunately you have come to incorrect understandings. 1) photons exist in both classical and quantum theory, the term photon has been around since 1916. 2) the direction of light is defined by the Poynting vector since 1884 3) electrons and photons apply force ... this is fundamental .... have you ever heard of a solar sail? 4) Yes beam width and spread angle are not independent ..... that is because the aperture caused BOTH the beam width and the spread angle. – PhysicsDave Aug 22 '22 at 18:44
  • @PhysicsDave Again, I am sticking purely to Maxwell's equations here. Maxwell's equation have no photons in them, photons were introduced before modern QM precisely to explain things that classical theory couldn't, and diffraction, as a classical effect, can wholly be explained without touching photons. Can you show me where Maxwell's equations have photons in them? The Poynting vector definition is wrong: superpose light beams going in two directions and the Poynting vector will not correctly distinguish two beams going two ways from one beam going in the vector sum of those directions. – HTNW Aug 22 '22 at 19:26
  • That's a good experiment ... let's cross 2 beams like they do in Ghostbusters movie! Where they cross they should expand according to your theory ... but they don't. – PhysicsDave Aug 22 '22 at 21:59
-2

Photons, including single photons interact with single edges. The effect is more noticeable when the edge is sharp. Photons are pulled around and behind the edge But photons also scatter away from the Edge. A single slit is created with two sharp edges. Each edge is diffracting and scattering photons on their way to the detection screen. On the screen you have four Single edge patterns overlapping to create a single slit interference pattern. See “Single Edge Certainty” at billalsept.com

Bill Alsept
  • 4,043
  • What does the down voter think a single photon does when it reaches an edge? Or do you not believe in single photons? – Bill Alsept Aug 20 '22 at 17:39
  • I cannot speak for the other downvoters but my downvote is for self promotion of your site. This site is for mainstream physics, which your site is not, so referencing it here is inappropriate – Dale Aug 20 '22 at 18:42
  • Is this being down voted because it's wrong? (I don't know if it's right or wrong, that's why I asked in the first place.) – billpg Aug 20 '22 at 18:47
  • @billpg I believe it to be correct in my opinion. Does anyone else have a theory or suggestion for what single photons do as they interact with an edge? Even the down voters do not suggest anything. – Bill Alsept Aug 20 '22 at 18:56
  • @Dale it was not a self promotion. It was an easier way to explain my point. – Bill Alsept Aug 20 '22 at 19:06