Re: ...no time...cont'd

Posted by Natalie L. Smith on Nov 13, 2002 at 19:42
(168.216.238.137)

Re: ...no time...cont'd (Pasti)

Stupid vaguely tangential question here:
I was just thinking about the whole idea of "radiant energy" and was examining some personal imagery that has, I think, led to some misconceptions. When I think of energy, specifically EM energy, radiating from an object, I have always had a vague associated image of it simply streaming out into some void, spewing those little photons out into the unknown. But, when I think about it from a wave/field perspective, it seems to me that the energy "loss" of the radiant object would necessarily be tied to an interaction with some other responsive particle. If the radiant object was, somehow, alone in the universe, such that the photon beam/light wave never, ever encountered any other matter at all, could it really be said to be radiating energy? But, then, when I think of it all from a particle angle, I have no problem with the concept of a particle leaving some collection of particles and just heading off into some void. But, how can an oscillating field be said to be sending out energy if there are no responsive particles to interact with? So, if a radiant object was absolutely alone in the universe, would it be radiating energy or not? Wouldn't the object have to somehow be energetically static, to avoid conservation violations? I guess, I'm just trying to say that radiant energy would REQUIRE there to be a recipient or the energy couldn't be said to be radiating. I just never thought about it like that before. Does that mean a photon can't leave without somewhere to go?
I am assuming ahead of time that this is a non-sensical question, and will be answered with a cyberspace slap-on-the-hand answer like, "But, a radiant object alone in the universe is an impossibility so the question is a non-question." But, anyway, the idea of radiation of gravitational energy sparked me to wonder. By "radiation of energy" in this broader, non-EM view, do we simply mean any field interaction? Wouldn't that then include ALL energy transfer?

Follow Ups:


Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:
Comments:

[ Forum ] [ New Message ]