if photons in motion have mass and energy why don't they knock stuff over

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by Old Man, Apr 8, 2004.

  1. Old Man

    Old Man Guest

    Quantum or Classical, photon or field, p = E / c (sans h).
    Sans mass, waves and photons push, and they push twice
    as hard when reflected. Momentum is conserved. Observe
    Compton. [Old Man]
     
    Old Man, Apr 8, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Do the math. Visible light has a wavelength of 5 * 10^(-9) m. Momentum
    of a photon is p = h/lambda. Thus p is approx. 1 * 10^(-25) kg m/s. Even
    for gamma rays, whose wavelengths are about 10^(-6) smaller, the
    momentum of a photon is only about 1 * 10^(-19) kg m/s. I don't think
    that could knock even an ant or a blade of grass over - do you?


    Bye,
    Bjoern
     
    Bjoern Feuerbacher, Apr 8, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Old Man

    4B Guest

    What about those small propels that "mysteriously" spin when they are put
    close to a source of light. Is not the momentum of the photons that make
    them spin?

    4B
     
    4B, Apr 8, 2004
    #3
  4. Old Man

    CeeBee Guest


    If morons like you have an Internet connection, why are they obsessed
    with trolling and crossposting?

    Go visit the dark side of the moon, and report back if light knocks you
    over there.
     
    CeeBee, Apr 8, 2004
    #4
  5. 1) Don't top-post, please.
    2) *Lots* of photons are acting there together.
    3) You need an apparat with very few friction forces for this to work.
    4) It is constructed especially to maximize the effect, by making one
    side black and the opposite one light-reflecting.

    Bye,
    Bjoern
     
    Bjoern Feuerbacher, Apr 8, 2004
    #5
  6. Old Man

    Martin Brown Guest

    And the cheap ones sold commercially spin the wrong way since the vacuum
    in them is relatively poor. Warm gas molecules recoiling on the black
    side of the vane dominate the forces acting.

    When you pump them down to much lower pressures the recoil of photons
    off the mirror side eventually dominates. It is quite a fun demo.

    Regards,
     
    Martin Brown, Apr 8, 2004
    #6
  7. How about making holes in a steel plate. A sufficiently powerful laser
    can put a hole in a 1/2 inch steel plate. If the light is coherent it
    can pack a punch.

    Bob Kolker
     
    Robert J. Kolker, Apr 8, 2004
    #7
  8. Old Man

    Don Stauffer Guest

    A number of deep space probes have had solar reflector attitude control
    panels. These use the photons to help stabilize or move the craft to a
    new attitude using the photon momentum. There have been many proposals
    over the years for solar sail propulsion for space probes.

    You don't ordinarily see the effect because the pressures are very small
    compared to pressures from even the most gentle breeze or air current.
    But they ARE there.
     
    Don Stauffer, Apr 8, 2004
    #8
  9. Dear 4B:

    I'll let you do your own search. Those devices are called "radiometers".
    If the envelope they are contained in contains any gas, then the black side
    moves away from the light source. If there is no gas, the white side moves
    away from the light source. I have never seen a radiometer with the white
    side moving away from the light, so I have never seen a completely
    evacuated one.

    I wonder if any of the space missions ever took a non-enclosed radiometer
    up with them?

    David A. Smith
     
    N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\), Apr 8, 2004
    #9
  10. Old Man

    John Navas Guest

    [POSTED TO rec.photo.digital - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    Mariner IV (the first Mars probe, which I worked on back in 1964) had solar
    pressure vanes, mounted on the ends of each of the four solar panels, that
    adjusted automatically when the attitude jets fired. After they found the
    right balance, the need for attitude gas was so greatly reduced that the
    spacecraft used only a fraction of the attitude gas that would have otherwise
    been required. <http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/tmp/1964-077A.html>
    <http://home.earthlink.net/~nbrass1/mariner/miv.htm>
    <http://home.earthlink.net/~nbrass1/mariner/mariner04.gif>

    The earlier Mariner II (the first Venus probe) had a solar sail, but it was
    less effective than the four solar pressure vanes on Mariner IV.
    <http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/tmp/1962-041A.html>
     
    John Navas, Apr 8, 2004
    #10
  11. The solar panels on Mariner 10 were used for attitude control
    via radiation pressure, by tilting them appropriately between
    Mercury encounters. This conserved attitude-control gas and
    helped give the third flyby. See
    http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/MasterCatalog?sc=1973-085A
    http://www.fukuoka-edu.ac.jp/~kanamitu/study/solar/solar/marin10.htm

    This was possible because the solar panels had to be large enough to
    deliver power not only at launch but during a Venus swingby, so
    there was more tolerance for off-normal pointing. In fact, the
    status report at
    http://www.google.com/url?sa=U&start=3&q=http://cps.earth.northwestern.edu/M10
    indicates that the controllers had to tilt the panels on some direction
    anyway for thermal control after the first Mercury encounter.

    Bill Keel
     
    William C. Keel, Apr 8, 2004
    #11
  12. Lets take a mol of these photons then.
    You can indeed lift glass spheres with a laser.
    It needn't be especially powerfull actually.
    A few mW are sufficient.

    Rene
     
    Rene Tschaggelar, Apr 8, 2004
    #12
  13. Old Man

    Old Man Guest

    In sci.physics, regardless of the OP's expectations, the point
    is always physics, and there's plenty of that in this thread.
    Jonathan is requested to peddle his cracked pottery elsewhere.

    [Old Man]

    [snip diarrhea]
     
    Old Man, Apr 9, 2004
    #13
  14. Old Man

    Old Man Guest

    At the time of writing, Poincaré probably knew little about
    relativistic invariance. He is forgiven. Jonathan isn't. Even
    Newton knew that acceleration and rotation rate weren't
    relative. Both are absolute and self-referential. Overcast
    skys that hide the "fixed stars" aren't an obstacle to their
    measurement. Local, self-referential, measurements are
    guarantied to reveal Mother Nature. Global concoctions
    are the fairy tales of metaphysics. The local speed of light
    is absolute. E(dot)B and E^2 - B^2 are local relativistic
    invarients. For electromagnetic plane waves, they are both
    absolutely zero, no matter the observer's relative velocity.
    [Old Man]
     
    Old Man, Apr 9, 2004
    #14
  15. Old Man

    Don Stauffer Guest

    What is the one leaving solar system? Voyager, I believe it is. The
    attitude control paddles are on the ends of the solar array panels.
    These paddles are not the entire attitude control. If I remember right,
    there are CMGs for primary, gas jets to desaturate wheel, and the solar
    paddles. The paddles take some of the load off the CMGs, so they do not
    approach saturation as often. There is a limited supply of gas, and
    using it too often to unload CMGs would exhaust gas sooner.

    Now, my memory is not as good as it should be, so maybe it was not
    Voyager, but one of the later probes that went out to Jupiter and Saturn
    (Mariner?). I know it was a deep space probe series, but it has been a
    lot of years since I worked with it, so I am having a hard time
    remembering its name. Anyway, it is one with four solar arrays, with a
    paddle at end of each array. Clearly visible in pictures.
     
    Don Stauffer, Apr 9, 2004
    #15
  16. Well, that's a common misconception: actually, photons are knocking things over
    all the time.
     
    Richard Schumacher, Apr 9, 2004
    #16
  17. The rhodopsin molecules in the cones take quite a beating.

    Bob Kolker
     
    Robert J. Kolker, Apr 9, 2004
    #17
  18. Old Man

    briggs Guest

    If he was doing that in air, he wasn't using photon pressure.

    Assume photon pressure is responsible.

    Assume a 1kg aluminum disk. That's 1 kg * 9.8 m/sec of momentum
    per second. Divide by 2 because that aluminum better be a damned
    good reflector. E = pc. So you have 1 kg * 9.8 m/sec / 2 * 3 * 10^8
    meters /sec ~= 7*10^8 joules every second = 700 megawatts of light power
    hitting an aluminum disk massing 1 kg.

    Assume 99.99 reflectivity. That's 70 kilowatts of heating power.
    Divide by 4.2 to get calories/sec, multiply by 10 because the
    specific heat of aluminum must be pathetic, divide by 1000 because
    it's one kilogram and you have around 150 degrees Celsius per
    second temperature rise, back-of-the-envelope.

    Note that disk mass factors out of the result. The bigger the
    disk, the bigger the mass, the more power you need and dividing
    out the thermal mass leaves you back where you started.

    Poof goes the aluminum disk, inside of ten seconds.

    I imagine you could pull the trick off by ablating aluminum. That'd
    cut your power requirements quite a bit and take care of the cooling
    concerns at the same time.
    Actually, they demonstrate the opposite. They demonstrate that
    whatever photon pressure there might be is inadequate to offset
    the temperature and pressure effects induced by those same photons.
    They spin the wrong way.

    John Briggs
     
    briggs, Apr 9, 2004
    #18
  19. Old Man

    mmeron Guest

     
    mmeron, Apr 9, 2004
    #19
  20. Old Man

    John Navas Guest

    [POSTED TO rec.photo.digital - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    You're thinking of Mariner (Mars and Venus, as noted in my earlier post) --
    Voyager has a different configuration. <http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/>

    In <> on Fri, 09 Apr 2004 08:47:15 -0500, Don
     
    John Navas, Apr 9, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.