Actually, the effect observed with Life Savers™ is triboluminescence.
This effect can be observed with most candy containing sugar. Plain hard sugar will work. The effect is amplified in Wintergreen flavor due to the chemical, methyl salicylate.
1. When the sugar crystals are broken by your teeth, the negatively charged particles break free. The resulting atoms in which were formerly within the matrix become positively charged. The free electrons are now released to zip around.
2. Nitrogen molecules in the air attach themselves to the broken surfaces of the sugar crystals. The free electrons strike the nitrogen molecules and cause them to emit invisible ultraviolet radiation and a visible glow.
3. UV radiation is absorbed by the wintergreen flavoring(methyl salicylate), causing a bright blue light to be emitted. The methyl salicylate is fluorescent, which means it absorbs light of a shorter wavelength and then emits it as light of a longer wavelength. UV has a shorter wavelength than visible light. When the wintergreen is crushed, the methyl salicylate molecules absorb the UV, the shorter wavelength of light produced by the excited nitrogen and re-emit it as light of the visible spectrum, in this case blue light.
One may also take a Life Saver and connect it with wires to a neon tube and strike the candy and the tube will flash. It might work with an LED.
The effect can also be observed when a piece of tape is ripped from a roll, but fainter.
As far as the nature of light, one finds either as determined by the nature of the experiment. If one tests for waves, waves are observed. If one tests for particles, particles are observed. No experiment has been devised to illustrate both effects at the same time. It may be impossible, but I would tend to think that by using a calcite crystal to split the light into two beams that one could be tested for particles and one for waves. But, this is not the same thing as finding both from one beam of light.
I think that someone earlier was commenting on the "mind-blowing" concept of QED and not the LED. I would have to agree. QED is is a topic that even stymied Einstein. He refused to believe in the "spooky action at a distance" observed in QED. The point is that particles may disappear here and re-appear elsewhere - instantaneously! John Stewart Bell provided a proof to illustrate this is the way Nature really operates. This has been proven by experiments.
Einstein never accepted this supposition because that would tend to negate his Theory of Relativity - something exceeding the speed of light. It also negates the possiblity of an objective reality. This may not be the case though. There could be some, as yet, undiscovered principle of Nature that would allow both effects to occur and both be true. Maybe due to multiple dimensions beyond the four that Einstein postulated.
The scientists that invented QED do not understand it completely. It is counter-intuitive. Anyone claiming to understand it completely is mistaken.
"Anyone who is not shocked by quantum theory has not understood it." - Niels Bohr
Fin
![Pampers Sensitive Baby Wipes, Clinically Proven, Fragrance Free, Unscented, Water Based, Hypoallergenic, Multi-Use, Hand Wipes 336 Wipes Total (6X Flip-Top Packs) [Packaging May Vary]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41KLBHu9CAL._SL500_.jpg)
