**Light reflection**

**R. Feynman's theory**

The phenomena of reflection and refraction (transmission) of light have been known for a long time, but the essence of these phenomena is still not clear.

Many scientists have tried and are trying to understand the essence of these phenomena. Some of them try to explain these phenomena, focusing on the wave component of light, while others on the corpuscular representation of light, for example, R. Feynman. But both of them operate with mathematical objects, so each of them gets an explanation that is obviously incomplete and will never turn out to be complete. If we operate with the essence of light, then someday the description of these phenomena may take on a reliable character.

The task of the writer of these lines is to look at the phenomena described by R. Feynman in a slightly different way. Quotations from R. Feynman's works are in italics. In his lectures “QED - STRANGE THEORY OF LIGHT AND MATTER” he writes:

* “I will proceed from the fact that you imagine the properties of light in everyday circumstances - for example, that light travels in a straight line, refracts, falling into water, that when light is reflected from a mirror surface, the angle of incidence is equal to the angle of reflection that light can be decomposed into colors, that very beautiful colors are visible on a puddle, when a little oil gets into it, that the lens focuses the light, etc. ...
I'm going to explain these phenomena using quantum electrodynamics. ”* (page 17).

But admits:

* “Partial reflection is already an incomprehensible enigma, and it was a very difficult task for Newton” * (p. 19).

For glass, the reflection is 4%. 96% of the light passes through the glass. The proposed partial reflection hypotheses do not suit Feynman.

* “One of the theories explaining partial reflection from one surface suggests that the surface consists mainly of“ holes ”that allow light to pass through and a few“ spots ”that reflect light” * (page 19).

* “Another possible theory is that photons have some kind of internal mechanism -" wheels "and" gears "that turn in some way - so that when the photon is" aimed "correctly, it passes through the glass and when it is wrong, it is reflected. ”* (p. 20).

In general, the conclusion is made:

* “No matter how hard we try to invent a reasonable theory explaining how a photon“ decides ”whether to go through glass or bounce back, it is impossible to predict how a given photon will move.”
“All we can predict is that out of 100 emitted photons, on average, 4 will be reflected from the surface” * (p. 20).
* “Nature only allows us to compute probabilities” * (p. 20).

And then in the same place:

* “If partial reflection from one surface is an incomprehensible enigma and difficult problem, then partial reflection from two or more surfaces is absolutely overwhelming.” *.

It turns out that the number of reflected photons from two surfaces depends on the thickness of the glass and periodically changes from 0 to 16. How to explain this phenomenon, and what difficulties arise in this explanation?

* “For many years after Newton, partial reflection from two surfaces was successfully explained by the wave theory, but when experiments were carried out in which very weak light shone on photomultipliers, the wave theory collapsed.
As the light grew dimmer, the photomultiplier tubes continued to emit full-weight clicks - only they were heard less and less often.
Light behaved like particles ”* (page 23).

Feynman's reaction to a given light behavior is as follows.

* “I'm not going to explain how photons actually“ decide ”whether to bounce back or go through.
This is unknown. (The question may not make sense.)
I'm just going to show you how to calculate the correct probability that light will bounce off glass of a given thickness, because that's the only thing physicists can do! ”* (p. 24).

And Feynman, with the help of a graphic apparatus invented by him, shows how a measured phenomenon can be described. In fact, this is the same wave theory, where the frequency is set by the clock, the amplitude is the vector sum of certain events, to which a certain probability is attributed.

* “However, I can guarantee… that any phenomenon associated with light that has been carefully studied can be explained by quantum electrodynamics; although I will only describe the simplest and most famous phenomena ”* (p. 36).

How does this electrodynamics explain that light should be reflected from a mirror, and that the angle of incidence is equal to the angle of reflection? Feynman draws the diagram below. It shows the possible paths for the movement of photons from the source S to the receiver P. (The division of the mirror into zones is conditional.) 41.

The rule is set:

* "... the real rule - and what actually happens - is much simpler: a photon entering the detector has almost equal chances of getting there by any route, so all arrows will have almost the same length" * (page 39).

Indeed, after adding all the arrows, in this case we will get some resulting arrow:

* “And notice - we've got a pretty long resultant arrow!
Quantum electrodynamics predicts that light should indeed reflect off a mirror! ”* (p. 42).

Where did we proceed from? From the fact that light is reflected from every point of the mirror.
If we believe that light is reflected from its parts, then we should immediately recognize that the light must __ necessarily __ be reflected from the mirror.

No one doubts that light is reflected from a mirror, but are there objective paths for photons, for example, SAP or SLP? Feynman argues that yes, but is it? No. The same is easy to check: remove mirror G or block the SGP path and there will be no light at point P. The probability of a photon getting to point P will be zero, despite the many ways Feynman proposed. This is described in the book "QED - a strange theory of light and matter".

* “Looking at the graph plotting the time for each trajectory, you will see that the time is almost the same for two adjacent trajectories at the bottom of the curve, where the time is smallest. ...
That is why, in a rough approximation, a simplified view of the world is acceptable, according to which light goes where the time is smallest (and it is easy to prove that where the time is smallest, the angle of incidence is equal to the angle of reflection, but I have no time to show you this) * (page 42).

The scientist R. Feynman explains the process of light reflection and the law of equality of angles of incidence and reflection so simply.

As the attentive reader can notice, the title of the work directly says * “strange theory of light and matter” *.
What is the strangeness? That it only explains what has already been explained by other theories?
Or that there is potential in this theory?
If we explain what is already known, then this theory can be extrapolated to the unknown.
It is difficult to understand what R. Feynman sees as strange in this theory, but for me the oddity lies in the fact that at the beginning of the work the author promises:

* “The main task of my lectures is to describe as accurately as possible the strange theory of the interaction of light and matter, or, more precisely, the interaction of light and electrons” *.

This is where I would like to know what is the mechanism of interaction between an electron and a photon. What interacts with them there? What are their elements involved in this process. To state that the probability of the result of this interaction such-and-such explains almost nothing in this interaction. It is not enough for a hare to know the likelihood of being caught by a fox or a wolf. He is interested in the catching mechanism in order to develop appropriate rescue tactics.

The persistent calculation of the probability of an event for years does not even say whether something happens to the participants in a strange interaction or whether they remain the same. Indeed, out of 100 photons falling on the glass, 4 are reflected, and 96 pass through the glass, but I would like to know if they remained the same during the interaction, as before, or did their quality somehow change? Feynman warned that science does not know this, so do not think about it, rather draw arrows.

But I will try to build physical models of the reflection and transmission of light through matter. Whether they are successful or not, time will tell. But the fact that it is precisely on physical phenomena that the reflection and transmission of light (and everything else) should be investigated is beyond doubt.

**Reflection of light from one surface. Quantum point of view.**

Based on the quantum device presented in the articles "Quantum of energy, what does it consist of" and "Quantum of energy, how it works and how it moves" , then you can imagine two such models of light reflection from one surface.

One of them is this. Consider (mentally) a greatly enlarged glass surface. We will see a surface covered with atoms and molecules, more precisely, these very molecules and atoms create this surface. These molecules and atoms do not lie in an even layer on this surface. Some atoms are above a certain conditional level, others are below. If the substance is amorphous, then the spread of the excess of some atoms over others is of a more chaotic order (naturally, under the condition of the same mechanical processing of the substance), and if the substance is crystalline, then the order will be more strict. With certain grinding or casting, some of the atoms will be approximately at the same level.

If we approach the atom, we will see the nucleus and electrons moving around it. Electrons can be represented in any form. Anyone who wishes can present it in Rutherford form (although this is not permissible for great scientists, since, for example, Feynman believes that this is 1910), and whoever considers himself more advanced can represent an electron in the form of a certain wave with one or another probability located at a certain point. The main thing is not to assume that this wave is standing still, but to believe that it moves along one or another trajectory around the nucleus. And it moves not chaotically, but along a certain trajectory.

We know that an electron has a negative charge, which creates a negative electric field around itself, which quickly dies out at the macroscale, but in the microcosm this is a working quantity. In general, the atom is neutral, but since the electrons are around the nucleus, there is an increased field strength near the orbits of the electrons. It is not uniform, but on average it is greater than the tension of air or vacuum. If we average this intensity, it turns out that the atoms are in this field.

The electrons of the glass body are completely in this field, and the electrons of the surface atoms, in part, fall into the air or vacuum zone. More precisely, let's say that the electrons of the atom “A” at the lowest point of their orbit are in a field of greater negative intensity than at the top point. (Fig. 1.)

But any change in the speed of an electron brings the electron to excited state . When the speed increases, it tries to emit a photon, and when the speed decreases, it tries to absorb the photon.

As soon as the electron on the “b” branch begins to decelerate, it acquires the property of absorbing photons. If a photon appears at this time, the electron will begin the absorption procedure. And here options are possible.

1. The electron turns out to be resonant to the given photon. In this case, the electron passes to another stable level and can be in this position for as long as desired, until some force slows it down or accelerates it. And this force just appears on the "a" branch. It will be opposite in sign, and its required value will be, exactly, at a symmetrical point on this branch. The absorbed photon will be emitted and the angle of incidence and the angle of reflection will be equal. If this accelerating force did not exist, then the photon would be absorbed and the electron in the atom would be at the formed level. On the second turn, another photon can be absorbed, if accelerations are allowed and a resonant photon will appear. And so on ad infinitum.

2. An electron cannot acquire resonance properties for a given spectrum at given accelerations. In this case, the photon cannot be closed in the electron and therefore the electron cannot hold it. And the photon starts to be emitted. At what point in the orbit the electron will emit a non-resonant photon is difficult to say, but it is obvious that this is exactly the point that changes the direction of radiation. Further, the photon moves along nonresonant electrons according to the Huygens hypothesis, that is, directly, absorbed and emitted by intermediate electrons.

In the case when there are no photons, the electron excited for absorption will remain in an excited state until the excitation is removed from the opposite branch. The cycle will repeat all the time.

Internal electrons are in the same conditions, they are not affected by the external boundary medium, and light can only propagate directly, in the direction given by the boundary electron.

When in the stream of photons, some will be resonant for some internal electrons, then these photons will be absorbed by these electrons, the electrons will go to the next levels. The luminous flux will decrease. But photons come and go. Where to get resonant electrons so that they absorb the next portions of photons? After the electron has passed to the next level, it can no longer absorb the same photon that transferred it to this level, but it can transmit such a photon. And transmission is the excitation of an electron.

Природа устроена так, что она сразу начинает действовать, а какой получится результат, она не знает. Поглощение фотона требует определенного времени (это и есть, коэффициент преломления). Когда фотон начинает поглощаться, электрон не знает, сможет он его поглотить, то есть резонансный ли для него этот фотон. Он просто поглощает его до конца и если место для фотона в электроне есть, то фотон поглощается и, несмотря на воздействие внешних сил (ядер и электронов), занимает другую орбиту, усиливая или ослабляя ковалентную связь. Если же фотон в процессе поглощения тянет электрон на другую орбиту, но сил мало (то есть он полностью поглотиться, а устойчивый уровень еще пока не достигнут), то внешние силы будут толкать его обратно, заставляя его излучать фотон.

In theory, these forces should force the electron to emit the last photon, but they will remember that they were energized by the previous photon. For these forces, the last level turns out to be less stable than the previous one. For this reason, they will force to emit not only the last, but also the penultimate photons. In fact, this is a photon of doubled energy, and for the visible spectrum, doubling of energy means a transition to the infrared range of radiation. A photon will be emitted, which is perceived by our body as thermal. The electron will now be ready to absorb the next photon. So the substance, heating up, will absorb the photons resonant to it, reducing the luminous flux. In the end, there is an equilibrium state between absorption and radiation. The number of resonant electrons of a substance determines the transparency of the substance.

The second model of light reflection from one surface is also possible. In the first model, an electron and a photon were of the same polarization, so the electron had to absorb a photon (this is how nature works) and then emit it. But if the electron and the photon are of different polarizations, then the electron cannot, by its nature, try on this photon, and if it is resonant, then absorb and go to the next level, and in the case of non-resonance, retransmit this photon. In this case, the electron immediately, quantum by quantum, reflects the given photon.

Let's return to the beginning of the article and recall the models of reflection and transmission of light through matter. It turns out that "spots" are resonant electrons, and "holes" are everything else. In particular, there are 4% resonance electrons on the glass surface, and there are almost no such electrons in the glass body. Although these are the same electrons, but under different conditions. "Wheels" and "gears" are the magnetic and electric fields of the photon. Everyone is a little right. In vain about this R. Feynman fell into pessimism.

**Reflection of light from two surfaces. Quantum point of view.**

How to explain that the number of reflected photons changes with the thickness of the glass plates? Above, we found out that electrons are in different degrees of immersion and some of them are included in the reflection mode. This can be both on the first surface and on the second.

When the plate is thin, there is no reflection at all. The near-boundary field is weakly expressed, so the electrons are slowed down and accelerated insignificantly. With increasing glass thickness, the number of reflected photons increases. At a certain thickness of the plate, close to the wavelength of the photon, 4 photons are reflected from both surfaces, that is, 4%. The counter will register 8 photons. We will try to understand how this happens.

As in the case of reflection from one plane, and for the reflection of light from two surfaces, we will consider several models. Maybe among them there will not be a single true one, or maybe some will be confirmed.

Suppose a light wave represents a flux photons 4 quanta in each photon, and the duration of the photons and the intervals between them are the same. Consider photons moving in parallel from right to left (Fig. 2.).

In case 1, the glass thickness is equal to half the wavelength radiation . In such a situation, when the beginning of photon 2 reaches a "transparent" electron on the first surface of the glass (this is how I named an electron that cannot absorb a photon, but only retransmits it), then photon 1 will have time to be reflected from the second surface and its beginning will also be a "transparent" electron.

And this is where the wonders of computer technology begin. When two photons act on an electron, the process of their addition occurs. And since these photons come to the electron from opposite sides, then this is just a subtraction. And there is no pronounced reflection from the glass. This is described in the article "Jung's Experience" . Their actions cancel each other out and nothing happens to the electron. Roughly speaking, one photon pushes an electron in one direction and another in the opposite direction. It turns out, as in mathematics: 4-4 = 0 and everything disappeared. But this is in mathematics, and this does not happen in nature. Energy does not disappear anywhere. It is easier to say that during this subtraction, a thermal photon was formed and went to heating the glass.

But this explanation is typical for science, but in reality, energy can be hidden. Everyone says that there is much more of it than visible energy. This latent energy is called dark. This is covered in the articles on quantum.

It is quite possible that a natural question may arise: why on earth should the reflected photon hit this very electron? Indeed, according to Feynman, this very photon can fly anywhere. And in the opinion of Schrodinger, such a hit is a probabilistic process.

I will answer this question with a question. And why does the light from the flashlight on the miner's head, reflected from something, get into his eyes? After all, it comes almost from the eyes. Or why is light (radio waves) from a radar antenna reflected into the same antenna? Why?

If anyone thinks about these questions, they can turn to the mathematical justification of this phenomenon in the form of a return Fermi-Pasta-Ulama . True, it is very difficult to understand how it all relates to nature, but the return does exist. This is confirmed by very simple experience. The transmitter at the Ostankino tower is loaded with return energy from each receiver, which is connected directly, not through a repeater, to the transmitter. The more receivers, the more power the transmitter should have.

And, finally, you can simply believe that this is possible, especially since it is at least slightly confirmed by experiments. After all, many believe in dualism and superposition, and they are supposedly confirmed only by Jung's experience and nothing else.

If the thickness of the glass is 7/8 of the wavelength, position 2, then photon 1 will be reflected earlier and one of its quanta will pass through the “transparent” electron, and the other three will react with three quanta of photon 2. The energy of the reflected photon will be represented by the remainder of the photon in one quantum. The instruments will show that the intensity of the reflected flux will be four times less than the incident flux.

With a glass thickness equal to 1/4 of the wavelength, position 3, the reflected flux will be represented by two quanta. Even thinner glass, position 4, will reflect three quanta. And the first surface can reflect a photon without loss.

In our case, with such a ratio of wavelength and photon length, with a glass thickness greater than a half-wave, photon 1 and photon 2 will not react at all. But photon 1 and photon 3 or some next photon can react. Eventually, the regularity will come, and it depends on the wavelength and length of the photon.

It should be noted that the wavelength does not mean a mathematical meaning with some positive and negative abstract values, but a real organization of real, objectively existing, portions of energy in the form of photons into periodic portions of motion. Roughly like planes entering in waves for bombing.

If this model is correct, then it indicates the possibility of producing photons of the required energy, and this is a direct path to building a quantum computer. And you won't go far with Feynman's arrows.

Index to section up