"Eugene Stefanovich" wrote in message
...
|
|
| Jan Panteltje wrote:
| 'It is written' that this cannot (has not?) been done [1].
|
| Before I delve deeper in the math, let us look at it from
| a slightly different perspective, a 'mechanical' analogy
| with waves.
|
| Just for arguments sake imagine a surface with hollow extrusions.
| A ball is sitting in each 'dip'.
|
|
| --- ----------
| \ O /
| --------
|
| When we excitate the surface with a sine wave, the ball gets excited
| by the maxima and minima of the wave (it starts jumping up and down
a bit).
|
|
| ABOVE A SPECIFIC LEVEL the ball will jump over the edge and roll
away, or
| even jump further up.
| You can envision this as shaking the container in the frequency of
the wave.
|
| When the frequency doubles, then 2 x more maxima (excitations) will
occur,
| and 2 x more balls will leave their hole.
|
| Below the threshold the ball will just vibrate a bit but stay in the
hole.
|
| When we replace 'ball' by electron, and wave by light, and the
threshold by
| the work function for a material, we have a model that would explain
the
| photo electric effect from a wave point of view.
|
| I even suspect we can find the specific values for the various
elements from
| their atomic structure (the container). [2]
|
| Right or wrong?
|
| How would you explain the fact that when the frequency of the wave is
| below the threshold, the ball will never leave the hole no matter
| how high is the amplitude of the wave? That's what happens in real
| photo-electric effect.
|
| Eugene.

I thought he did.
"Below the threshold the ball will just vibrate a bit but stay in the
hole."
Did he say "amplitude"?
What am I missing here?
Androcles.