Talk:Absorption (electromagnetic radiation)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Physics (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Glass (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Glass, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of glass on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
 

I want an example for change from colorless to colored by using UV spectroscopy.

Spectroscopy doesn't change the colour of a compound, it measures it. UV spectroscopy measures UV light absorbed by an compound. If a compound does not absorb any light in the visible spectrum, the compound therefore appears colourless, even though it may absorb light in other areas of the electromagnetic spectrum, for example ultraviolet, infrared, x-rays, gamma rays etc. Silver 10:14, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Absorption is when light absorbs something.

Firstly, I hope you don’t mind I corrected your spelling and actually, absorption in a physics context means when something absorbs light. Light, in reference to all electromagnetic radiation, not just visible light, is just packets of energy called photons, to which electrons then absorb. The photon does not absorb the electron. Silver 10:14, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Absorption is when light absorbs something. Thats hilarious. anyways, i was wondering if someone could give me a really good and thoughrough explanation of how the energy of the excited electron transforms to heat energy. I dont mean re-emitted as electro-magnetic radiation, i mean heat. thats kinetic, how does that happen? its part of my personal investigation into colour. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.245.156.15 (talk) 11:32, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

First of all, something absorbs light, not the other way around. Next, to my knowledge, there is no microscope with which we can see how some material actually absorbs a photon. But as a result of many kinds of studies, it has been surmised there are a number of results from the absorption of photons by some material and that the energy of the absorbed photon is transferred to the material and often converts the atoms, molecules, or ions of the material to a higher energy state. These higher energy states are typically unstable and may convert quickly or not so quickly to other higher energy states or conditions. Such conditions may include faster flying (translating), rotating, or vibrating atoms, molecules, ions, or free radicals. This means the molecules, etc. get more internal energy, and therefore have more heat and are hotter (higher temperature). H Padleckas (talk) 04:02, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

absorption[edit]

what means of absorption ??????????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.208.91.247 (talk) 05:28, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

The lead of this article explains absorption in terms of quantum electrodynamics. Absorption is an every-day phenomena that can be explaned with classical physics (e.g. Beer-Lambert law) and should be described in a simple way. I think the lead of this article should be totally rewritten with a non-physicist reader in mind. Ulflund (talk) 09:40, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
Two versions back in the edit history there was an acceptable lead section, so I reverted back to that. Ulflund (talk) 11:37, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Forests[edit]

I have removed an off-topic section about forests and glaciers because the section was partially off-topic, and the on-topic part was just an example of one case where radiation is absorbed, among hundreds of similar examples. Why wouldn't we write about absorption by skin, sunglasses, getting suntan, creating X-rays measuring the absorption in tissues, or any other absorption in the world? This article has really nothing to do with forests or glaciers. --Lumidek (talk) 21:00, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Merge with opacity (optics)[edit]

I feel that Absorption should not be combined with opacity. I have looked up Absorption as a means of understanding the concept within Meteorology. I, however have no idea what Opacity is, and thus feel it would confuse the matter of a relatively simple definition. 92.236.150.158 (talk) 15:34, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

According to that article, "Opacity is the measure of impenetrability to electromagnetic or other kinds of radiation, especially visible light." In other words, precisely the concept that you're looking up.
Based on the conversation at Talk:Opacity (optics), it seems like the best idea is to get rid of the opacity article and move some of the content here (and elsewhere), keeping this page with the same article title. --Steve (talk) 03:40, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Closing proposal: I edited both articles so they have clear and distinct scopes. I don't think merging is appropriate anymore. --Steve (talk) 14:36, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Looks good; thanks. Dicklyon (talk) 15:52, 2 August 2009 (UTC)