The answer is independent of frequency, it is the nature of the particle (electron vs. photon) that is key. I have forgotten the terminology, but one type of particle is called a boson, and per my (quite possibly faulty) recollection, bosons do not interact with electromagnetic fields. For example, you can use either an electric or magnetic field to deflect and point an electron beam, but you cannot do so with a beam of light.
>From: "Chris Maxwell" <[email protected]> >To: <[email protected]> >Subject: RE: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ? >Date: Fri, Jan 10, 2003, 9:23 AM > > > OK, > > Enough of this regulatory blah, blah, blah...(although that's what we get > paid for). How about a hypothetical question... > > Typical radiated emissions measure a time varying electric field produced > by the acceleration of electrons. When electrons accelerate back and forth > at a given frequency; then you get EM (ElectroMagnetic) radiation at that > frequency. At these frequencies, we have electron flow in conductors. The > electron acceleration in one conductor (say your computer backplane) gives > off an EM field which will cause a similar electron flow in another > conductor placed some distance away (the measurement antenna). Notice that > in this case, we don't have electrons changing energy states, we just have > free electrons flowing and accelerating. > > Fiber optic cables carry light, which is modeled as photons produced by > electrons changing energy states. We still can model this with similar > wave equations as used for any old EM radiation; but here we have radiation > flow in an insulator. We also throw in the concept of "photons" whereby we > try to quantize the radiation. Light won't (appreciably) flow at all in a > conductor. So, we don't consider fiber optic cables to be susceptable to > "EMI"; and we don't consider them to give off "EMI". I think that we all > agree that trying to measure the "conducted" or "radiated" emisions from > fiber optic cables is not required by any standard. They do "conduct" > light; but it is a conduction of photons; not the conduction of free > electrons that the standards try to measure. > > However, I can think of some lower frequencies (lower than light, that is) > that use dielectric waveguides similar to fiber optics; yet they produce > and are susceptable to EMI. For example, many GPS antennas us dielectric > waveguides at the GPS frequency (about 1.5GHz, if I recall correctly) > > So where is the "crossover point"? Does it have to do with skin depth? > Maybe the photoelectric effect? Why don't we talk about photons at 1Ghz? > Is it just because we don't have a material with the correct band gap to > produce a 1Ghz photon? On the other hand, can free electrons be > "conducted" at light frequencies; or isn't there a material with enough of > a skin depth at such frequencies? Anybody want to take a stab at > enlightening(no pun intended) us all on this one? I guess I'm just too > lazy to brush up on my quantum mechanics. It's too bad that Einstein died > before we came up with listservers. I have about a million questions for > him. He probably would have taken a job as an EMC guy just to pay the > bills while he was working on relativity. > > Sure, its a hypothetical question; but it may provide a deeper > understanding of why we don't throw fiber optic cables in the coupling clamp. > > I can smell the collective cranial smoke from the group already. That's good. > > Inquizzitively and antagonistically, > > Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division > email [email protected] | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797 8024 > > NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA > web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 | > > > > > > ------------------------------------------- > This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety > Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. > > Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ > > To cancel your subscription, send mail to: > [email protected] > with the single line: > unsubscribe emc-pstc > > For help, send mail to the list administrators: > Ron Pickard: [email protected] > Dave Heald: [email protected] > > For policy questions, send mail to: > Richard Nute: [email protected] > Jim Bacher: [email protected] > > All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: > http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ > Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list" > This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: [email protected] with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: [email protected] Dave Heald: [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: [email protected] Jim Bacher: [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"
