How is electricity transmitted thru light waves?

Additional source:

Note the lack of mysterious definitions invoking some kind of entity that you are asserting. BTW, try referencing a physics textbook rather than websites and quick overviews in manuals.

Electromagnetic radiation carries energy, yes. Electromagnetic radiation is a transverse wave that propagates through the electric and magnetic fields, with two components in phase related by E =cB, and propagating at c. The energy (density) carried by an electromagnetic wave is described by the Poynting vector. Do you know what the mathematical expression for that is? How it's derived? What it means?

Energy can be converted from one form to another, because of the virtue of the fact that it's simply the capacity to do work. Otherwise, making assertions like "X is energy" don't have any meaning. Tell me how the following makes sense: "Electromagnetic radiation is the capacity to do work." It doesn't, because you aren't using the correct definition of energy.

I've tried to answer your question, but you repeatedly deny accepted physics in this case (which I've never seen you do in any other posts). So, are you going to continue to argue with two textbooks on the subjects at hand?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I think I'm done here. He expects me to repeat what he says like it was God's own truth. I don't do that shit..

Postscript: seems to me the word energy suffers the inconvenience of having to refer to two different things: a function in equations and a thing in itself. Matter happens to have a similar duality, only in its case we have mass to distinguish the function or property from the thing itself. Matter is the stuff..Mass is the property. But with energy we just have the word energy. Energy is the stuff. And energy is also the property. Both references are correct imo..Same word used in two different senses. They should've come up with a different word.."energyness" or something..

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What an unnecessary argument you two have been having. The term "energy" refers to a capacity, like an ability, not to any specific entity.

So how is electricity transmitted through light waves? In the form of a solar panel?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Okay, I'm fine with that explanation in the postscript. If you're using energy in a different context, not how it's typically used in textbooks, then I retract the statements.

Which is exactly what I wrote. It's the capacity to do work.

Through its electric and magnetic field components. These can act on charged particles to produce an electric current, or can excite electrons out of the atoms they're confined to. For example, a wire through which alternating current is flowing will radiate electromagnetic waves, as it contains accelerating electric charges. The electromagnetic waves can then travel through space to another wire, in which its electric field will cause the charges to begin to oscillate, inducing an AC current.

 

I don't think the folks at the Goddard Space Center will argue with what Mark said. Ask them. You're getting some pretty coherent answers from Mark. You just don't realize it at this stage of your ability to comprehend mathematical physics.

 

Before going any further, perhaps it will help to narrow down the actual points of agreement/disagreement if all 'sides' in this discussion agreed on a mutually satisfactory answer to the above question, so that they can start afresh from common ground of 'on the same page' set of mutual 'understandings'?

At this juncture, I feel that this is the only way the conversation can ever move beyond the usual 'apples and oranges' misunderstandings/exchanges arising from different perspectives based on unexamined 'underlying' assumptions not recognized and/or not agreed upon by all.

Thanks for this interesting thread and conversation between you so far. Good luck to your discussion, guys.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Mark I note your comment about light "transmitting electricity" in the guise of alternating current. Agreed. I said it doesn't but I was rather thinking of electricity in terms of a direct current of electrons rather than alternating current or displacement current. Sorry about that.

But can I challenge you on this?

My reading of the original Einstein is that it does make sense to say electromagnetic radiation "is" energy. Consider Compton scattering, where some of the E=hf wave energy is converted into the KE=½mv² kinetic energy of an electron. If you performed a further Compton scatter on the residual photon, again some of the photon energy is converted into the kinetic energy of an electron. Keep doing it, and in the limit you have no wave energy and so no photon left. It has been completely converted into the kinetic energy of electrons. And note that you could have put that photon through pair production instead, and made an electron (and a positron) out of it.