shminux comments on If You Were Brilliant When You Were Ten... - Less Wrong

24 Post author: AspiringKnitter 27 December 2011 02:33AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (68)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: shminux 27 December 2011 07:41:50PM 4 points [-]

I was lucky enough to sit in the Physics Lecture every week with Feynman for a few years.

Ohh, please tell us more stories about Feynman!

He asked questions when he didn't understand things. I even got to tell him something that he admitted wasn't trivial when I was a 2nd year graduate student. (It was that photons in a waveguide have a finite rest mass, whereas it is only photons in free space that have zero rest mass and travel at the speed of light.)

Huh, didn't think about it before, but now it seems obvious. I've been explaining to people that only single idealized photons are massless, and any system containing more than one photon (except maybe as a coherent state) has rest mass, but never thought to apply it to light in a medium with n>1.

Comment author: mwengler 27 December 2011 09:23:42PM 10 points [-]

Ohh, please tell us more stories about Feynman!

This is not one I observed myself, but it circulated when I was around.

Feynman was sitting on the qualifying exam of a theoretical physics PhD candidate. If you have read Feynman you know he always realated theory to reality. So he asked this student "what is the wavelength of visible light?" The student said he had no idea. As is common in an exam like this, Feynman invited the student to consider what he knew about the real world and see if he could come up with something. The student suggested "the wavelength is 1 in normalized units" which is just pure BS anyway. Feyman asked the student to show him what he thought the wavelength might be by holding up his fingers. The student indicated with his thumb and forefinger about an inch apart.

Here's the punchline: Feynman says to the student and says "Do I look fuzzy to you?"

I found this hilariously funny when I first heard it, which was after I had been working on millimeter-wave quasioptical systems. I'll come back tomorrow and 'splain the punchline for those who don't care to learn quasioptics between now and then.

Comment author: shminux 27 December 2011 09:55:57PM 4 points [-]

Here's the punchline: Feynman says to the student and says "Do I look fuzzy to you?"

Well, at this point in the exam everything must have looked fuzzy to the hapless candidate. Seriously, though, it is hard to believe that someone at that level would not know basic stuff like that.

Comment author: mwengler 28 December 2011 06:35:10PM 2 points [-]

The wavelength of light must be smaller than something you can see using light. So the student should have known the wavelength of light must be smaller than the width of the hairs on his knuckles, < ~50 um. While this might seem to be a very specialized knowledge, the wave mechanics behind this limit feed right in to things like the heisenberg uncertainty principle and many of the properties of fourier transforms, really very basic stuff in lots of physics. If light had a wavelength of 1 inch, the best images we could make of the people we saw would have about an inch of "blurring" on them, looking like an out of focus picture.

Comment author: Solvent 31 December 2011 11:36:32AM 0 points [-]

The wavelengths and frequencies of all the sections of the em waves were required knowledge in my high school physics course.

Besides, these days everyone has a laser, and you can remember its wavelength. (My green one is 531 nm.)

Comment author: CronoDAS 30 December 2011 04:23:09AM 0 points [-]

Here's the punchline: Feynman says to the student and says "Do I look fuzzy to you?"

"Actually, now that you mention it, I think I might need some new eyeglasses..."

Comment author: mwengler 27 December 2011 09:40:17PM 3 points [-]

Huh, didn't think about it before, but now it seems obvious. I've been explaining to people that only single idealized photons are massless, and any system containing more than one photon (except maybe as a coherent state) has rest mass, but never thought to apply it to light in a medium with n>1.

Its not because the index is > 1. Interestingly, we do say photon velocity = c/n so presumably in some real sense a photon in an index n>1 medium must have a finite rest mass, but that is not what I figured out with waveguides.

With waveguides, there is a cutoff frequency, and the group-velocity of radiation in the waveguide gets lower as frequency drops until at the cutoff frequency the group-velocity is zero (and the phase velocity is infinite.) So we have a photon at cutoff frequency with zero group velocity but still finite energy hfc (planck's constant h times the cutoff frequency fc). so its restmass expressed in units of energy is hfc. Impressively, as you "accelerate" the photon, and calculate its total energy, you do find that it is hfc * ( 1 + (v_g^2)/2 + higher order terms ) which is identical for regular particles with rest mass in the theory of relativity.

In principle, a low enough loss waveguide held vertically in earth's magnetic field would have hfc stationary photons from its top end accelerated by gravity come out the bottom end with finite group velocity and therefore higher frequency f > fc (becasue hf is the energy of any photon, so if its energy increased from falling through a gravity potential, its frequency must have increased too). This is a wierd example of the well-known general relativistic blue-shift from light falling down a gravitational well.

Its been years since I thought about this stuff.