Quote:
Originally Posted by humanbydefault  Your quoted argument speaks about the 'impossibility of "particles" to go throught the GAP and never come back from it, I see the phenomenon the entire opposite way.
|
Dear HBD ..... I think I may have a different interpretation than yours to the 'quantum gap.
I don't see it as a physical gap ... but as a percentage difference between the maximum efficiency achievable and the actual efficiency we have been able to achieve so far. To breach or bridge this gap is to improve the efficiency of the light interacting properties of the compound.
A banal example (figures made up) would be that if a sheet of glass was capable of passing 90% of light and reflecting only 10% then its efficiency is 90%. But if in practice the best efficiency we can achieve is 20% and 80% reflected then the 'Quantum Gap' is 70%. (the difference .... (90% - 20% ) = 70% Gap
As to the Quantum Mechanics behind the 'maximum efficiency' achievable I know nothing. Perhaps it is to this part you are referring ?
cool bananas ... greg
