Are there more photons than particles always?

[Diamonds]

I tried AI and it said there are 1000000000 photons compared to 1 particle. But how about 4 billion years ago? Amount of photons is increasing but amount of particles are more stable? Was there 4 billion years ago some kind of different relation between photons and particles?

And how about the vaccuum energy. There are these short living virtual particles too? Should they make this relation to change somehow? 

And photons move fast speed away. Are there somewhere places where particles win the amount of photons?

My basic idea is that there are exactly same amount of photons and particles but AI is not having the same idea. 

[Vmedvil]

On 5/3/2025 at 2:24 AM, Diamonds said:

I tried AI and it said there are 1000000000 photons compared to 1 particle. But how about 4 billion years ago? Amount of photons is increasing but amount of particles are more stable? Was there 4 billion years ago some kind of different relation between photons and particles?

And how about the vaccuum energy. There are these short living virtual particles too? Should they make this relation to change somehow? 

And photons move fast speed away. Are there somewhere places where particles win the amount of photons?

My basic idea is that there are exactly same amount of photons and particles but AI is not having the same idea. 

Well, a Photon is a light packet, I don't think that number ever changes unless they are focused using like a magnifying glass however, I could be wrong, though the size varies of the photon. Maybe you should do an experiment to test your theory with a magnifying glass to see if the density of photons can change according to what my research said it can change in size the photon packet. Can the quantum properties of a photon change, honestly, I don't know.

Link = DOE Explains...Photons | Department of Energy

"No, a photon's size is not constant. It's generally considered to be the size of its wavelength, which varies depending on the type of light. Different types of light, like X-rays and radio waves, have different wavelengths, and therefore, different "sizes". The size of a photon is also influenced by the experimental setup used to measure it, making it not a fixed characteristic. 

 

Here's a more detailed explanation:

• Wavelength Dependence:

  A photon's "size" is most closely related to its wavelength. Wavelength determines the type of light (e.g., visible light, X-rays, radio waves). Shorter wavelengths (like X-rays) are considered smaller, while longer wavelengths (like radio waves) are larger. 

   
• Experimental Measurement:

  The size of a photon can be measured using interference patterns, but the result depends on the specific experimental setup and light source. This means that the measured size can vary, making it not a fixed property. 

   
• No Fixed Volume:

  Unlike particles with definite dimensions, photons are more like wave packets. They don't have a fixed volume or a well-defined shape. 

   
• Lorentz Transformations:

  The width of a photon perpendicular to its direction of travel is invariant across different coordinate systems, meaning it doesn't change with velocity, which is a consequence of well-proven Lorentz transformations. "

Edited Tuesday at 06:47 PM by Vmedvil

[OceanBreeze]

Vic, unless I misunderstood Diamonds’ OP, he was asking about the number of photons compared to the number of “particles”, which is already problematic because photons are particles. In that regard, his question really doesn’t make any sense.

This is a perfect example of not using clear unambiguous language when posting on this forum.

In an attempt to salvage something out of this thread, I will assume he is comparing the number of photons with the number of particles of matter.

In that case, the photons win by a huge margin, just as his AI answer pointed out.

Why is this the case, you may ask? The answer is that in the past, the early Universe was like a very hot bowl of soup. Like a hot bowl of soup, it will cool down to the ambient surrounding temperature.

As it cools it must lose energy, to the ambient surroundings and it does this by releasing photons. This is called thermal emission, or in some cases Black Body Radiation.

 

Here is where it gets interesting: the ultimate goal that all radiating bodies are trying to reach is Absolute Zero. The thing is, reaching that goal is an impossibility, even given an infinite amount of time.

 

Think about this for a moment and let it sink into your curious brain cells: If all bodies are constantly emitting thermal radiation in the form of photons, and will do this forever because it is impossible for the body temperature to ever reach absolute zero,

Question1) Does this mean all bodies of matter, down to the smallest molecule, possess a store of infinite energy? How else can they radiate photons forever?

The answer was provided by Zeno, thousands of years ago. The amount of thermal radiation is constantly decreasing, as the hot object cools down. So, even though the radiation continues forever, Zeno comes to the rescue: Suppose the rate of energy emission halves every interval. Then the total amount of energy emitted over infinite time, taking what’s emitted in the first interval as “one unit”, is 1 + 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16 + …, and that doesn’t go to infinity — it converges at 2. It is an example of an infinite series that converges on a finite number.

Question 2) Is this evidence there are far more photons in the Universe that particles of matter? Yes! If even a simple molecule radiates thermal energy in the form of photons, continuously and forever, It does stand to reason that photons will always outnumber particles of matter.

 

To find a possible exception to this you would need to look back in time to just about one second after the Universe came into existence. At that time, the Universe consisted of an extremely hot, dense plasma where photons were absorbed as soon as they were emitted. Thus, there was a form of thermal equilibrium where neither matter nor electronic energy dominated.

There is a lot more I could add to this chronological log of events, but it does get very complicated. One key take away I hope you get out of all of this is that it is all driven by temperature; The rate of cooling down of the Universe

If there is enough interest perhaps we can delve deeper into this thread, or start another