Another speed of light: the function followed.

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of light speed, particularly in the context of electromagnetic waves and their representation through sinusoidal functions. Participants explore the implications of light traveling along a curve and how this relates to the constant speed of light.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that if light travels along a sinusoidal function, its speed would effectively double and vary with frequency, challenging the notion of a constant speed of light.
  • Another participant expresses uncertainty about the initial claim, indicating that light's wave nature does not imply that photons change direction to follow a wavy path.
  • A third participant clarifies that the sinusoidal variation in an electromagnetic wave pertains to the electromagnetic field rather than the displacement of photons.
  • A later post reiterates that sinusoidal graphs represent electric and magnetic fields, not the position of light in the direction of wave propagation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus, as there are competing views regarding the interpretation of light's behavior in relation to sinusoidal functions and the implications for its speed.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the assumptions made about the relationship between the speed of light and its representation in sinusoidal graphs, as well as the definitions of terms used in the discussion.

Giulio B.
We always consider light speed as v=lambda/T but for a moment let's suppose that light would travel all around the function, following the whole curve.
In this case its speed would be at least doubled (should not be difficult to calculate it) and it will constantly change depending on the frequence.

So I'm not talking about the speed of light as v=lambda/T but how much space light really travel on.
if the classical rule is right, for absurde, it means that a photon, following the function (y=sen...etc) must absolutly maintain his horizzontal speed constant, so, this means, that in a wave the photon would accelerate a lot when the curve begins to be almost vertical, then when it returns almost orizzontal (the top or the bottom) it would decrease his speed relative to the horizontal travelling...and this is impossible for the standard theory (standard for me is height school physics, what i am doing); as the bible says, c is constant.
(i know i semplified about waves photons and functions...probably are the same thing)

So should not be considered c speed as its entire track, the whole function followed?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Science news on Phys.org
I'm not really sure that I understand your question, but it appears that you think of light as photonic particles moving in a sinusoidal path like a snake. That isn't what the wave nature of EM is actually about. The wave function travels at a constant c. I'll have to leave it up to someone else to explain it in more detail. For now, just bear in mind that the photons themselves are not constantly shifting direction in order to follow a wavy path.
 
The sinusoidal variation in an EM wave is the variation in the electromagnetic field itself, not displacement as is the case with a wave on a string.

Claude.
 
Last edited:
Giulio B. said:
We always consider light speed as v=lambda/T but for a moment let's suppose that light would travel all around the function, following the whole curve.

The sinusoidal graphs you usually see in connection with light describe the the electric or magnetic field, and have no connection whatsoever with position (in the direction perpendicular to the direction the wave is traveling).

The vertical units of such a graph are volts/meter or Newtons/coulomb (for electric field) or tesla (for magnetic field), not meters.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K