Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
How is electromagnetic radiation produced?
I need someone to tell me if my understanding is correct and if not to explain why.
So from my understanding there are two ways in which me radiation is emitted. Firstly when a photon is absorbed by an electron and the electron is excited into a higher energy state. The electron then de-excites by emitting a photon. The second way is when a charged particle such as an electron has a change in velocity. For example in a hot material the electrons have random motion in all directions and so are constantly accelerating and emitting radiation.
I feel like this is not correct, or that the two are somehow the same. Please can someone explain to me the correct way in which em radiation is emitted. Thanks.
2 Answers
- ?Lv 77 years agoFavorite Answer
The classical view is that EM radiation is produced by (an) accelerating charge(s). The charge doesn't have to be an electron. This is fine in 'classical' situations (e.g. the production of radio waves from a radio transmitter as the conduction electrons oscillate).
But this doesn't work when you consider atomic-scale systems (including very short EM wavelengths) and you have to interpret the process using quantum mechanics (or more precisely, quantum electrodynamics). This treats EM radiation as photons; a photon is produced whenever charges in a system change state.
The 2 views (classical and quantum) are of course linked. The classical case is the limiting quantum mechanical case for a system in which the energy levels can be considered so close that they form a continuum.
- 7 years ago
You are very much on the right lines, but you are being a bit parochial about it.
Take a wider view and think about "conservation of energy". You know, the bit about "Energy cannot be created or destroyed but....".
When anything changes from a higher energy state to a lower energy state, >>something<< has to happen to the excess energy.
In the case of your electrons, that extra energy is often converted to e-m radiation and released as a photon. The bigger the difference between the two energy levels, the higher the photon energy, and therefore frequency, will be.
Quoting: "Firstly when a photon is absorbed by an electron and the electron is excited into a higher energy state."
That could be the case, if we are talking about fluorescence, etc, but unnecessarily limits the general point. In a practical case, you want to deliberately produce photons by exciting electrons into higher energy levels directly, either electrically, thermally or chemically for example, so that they emit photons when they decay back into their lower states. Think LEDs, fireworks, red-hot pokers.
The point about accelerating charged particles is a good one, but what you are saying is that you are adding or removing kinetic energy to/from your particles, and that energy has got to come from/go to somewhere. Using an alternating electric field to accelerate electrons backwards and forwards along an antenna wire perhaps?
I hope that hasn't just added to the confusion :-)