Luca ha scritto:
> E l'effetto compton?
Pare che in questo libro l'effetto Compton standard venga trattato
classicamente:
"Atoms and light" by John N. Dodd (Plenum Press, New York, 1991).
Vedi il thread
http://www.usenet.com/newsgroups/sci.astro/msg02581.html:
<<You should take a look at
"Atoms and light" by John N. Dodd (Plenum Press, New York, 1991).
In Chapter 6, the Compton scattering is treated in an entirely
classical way, without using energy and momentum conservation,
but just standard classical em + relativistic *kinematics*,
by the picture of a circularly polarized em wave impinging upon
a charged particle.
The calculation is based on deriving a steady-state solution
for the down-stream motion of the particle which is superimposed
to the constant rotation at the frequency of the passing wave.
I haven't read the analysis in detail, but my first impression
is that it is quite clever.
It is, especially in light of the comments at page 55, apparent
that the standard Compton effect, i.e. the one the Compton
explained using the notion of photon, does not actually *need*
this notion.
So, according to the author, the standard (spin-free) Compton
effect cannot be invoked to argue the existence of photons. >>
Received on Tue Dec 05 2006 - 18:08:58 CET