Wavelength of Light: What is the Nature of This Phenomenon?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter wespe
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Light Wavelength
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of light, specifically focusing on the concept of wavelength and its relationship to frequency, particularly in the context of relativistic effects and wave/particle duality. Participants explore theoretical implications and challenges regarding the understanding of light as both a wave and a particle.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether wavelength shortens as frequency increases when a light source approaches the lab frame and suggests that diffraction could demonstrate this change.
  • Another participant proposes that wavelength may have two components related to electric and magnetic fields, and expresses uncertainty about the relevance of wavelength in modern physics.
  • A different viewpoint suggests that light should be considered as a probability wave, raising questions about the validity of discussing wavelength in this context.
  • One participant introduces the idea that a photon could be viewed as a peak carrying multiple frequency components, and speculates on the implications for understanding light phenomena.
  • Another participant discusses the concept of photons as particles that exhibit wave characteristics, suggesting that frequency relates to the number of photons intercepted by an observer.
  • Clarifications are made regarding the relationship between wavelength and frequency, with some participants noting that they may not apply uniformly under different conditions.
  • There is acknowledgment of the ongoing debate regarding the wave/particle duality of light, with participants noting that evidence supports both perspectives.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the nature of light, with no consensus reached on the validity of the concepts discussed. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of wavelength and frequency in the context of modern physics.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of defining wavelength in light, particularly in relation to relativistic effects and the wave/particle duality. There are indications of missing assumptions and unresolved theoretical implications.

wespe
Messages
202
Reaction score
0
Hey guys,

I've started a thread in usenet sci.physics.relativity

http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?h...9&seekm=SrSIc.48884$oh.46343@lakeread05#link4

but the answers given there didn't really satisfy me, so I'm back here.

I couldn't get people there to confirm that wavelength shortens as frequency increases when light source approaches lab frame, and that we could prove the change in wavelength by examining diffraction through a slit. Am I wrong? Why hesitate to confirm that wavelength shortens, I don't understand.

I'm thinking maybe wavelength has two components, one from electic and one from magnetic fields, and diffraction is due to the component perpendicular to light's direction, and the shortened wavelength is the other component. Wild guess, eh? I'm afraid to ask this on usenet.

On the other hand, I know that light isn't considered an electromagnetic wave anymore. There is wave/particle duality. I know light is considered as a probability wave and it collapses when detected, or something like that. But then, I'm confused, can we really talk about a wavelength associated with light or is it a leftover from the days of electromagnetic theory of light?

Now, you know I'm not the crackpot I used to be. But, this is theory development, and I'd like to throw in an idea. Instead of saying light explores all possible paths, maybe we could say a photon is a peak, and according to Fourier transform, carries all possible frequencies. A single photon then can interact with itself after passing through two slits, because some of the frequency components would be filtered. Wavelength of light then would be the distance between two consecutive peaks (a single photon would not have a wavelength). Yeah, probably a stupid idea, and of course I haven't thought how to explain other light phenomena with this. And it is too simple so someone must have thought of it before. I'd appreciate if anyone knows a website that discusses this. Thanks.
 
Science news on Phys.org
not sure if a "wavelength" applies to light anymore or not, i haven't kept up with the current descriptions, but last i heard lead me to believe that the photon does exist as a particle, and exhibits the characteristics of a wave, not in a standing wave sense with peaks and troughs but more of a compression wave, where frequency would be the number of photons intercepted by an observer in a second.

as such, doppler effects of photons would be easy to imagine, changing the spacing of the photons (but not the actual speed of the photons) as an object approaches or recedes, by virtue of emitting them closer or farther than would be if the object was stationary.

also in this model a photon by itself would carry no wavelength or frequency on its own, color can only be defined as multitudes of photons and their progression intervals
 
well actually to clarify, wavelength and frequency would be the same thing in the above description, the distance between consecutive photons would also be the frequency... well... not if you're moving towards the light source... but that's another theory altogether i think
 
The wave/particle duality you mention is so named because experiments done on light give evidence to both of then.
We are still not completely sure whether light is a wave or particle allthough many scientists can argue strongly for both cases. if you can supply good evidence for your theories and apply them to all circumstances then you might be right.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 66 ·
3
Replies
66
Views
8K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K