Can Kinetic Energy in Electromagnetic Waves Explain Their Speed in a Vacuum?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between kinetic energy in electromagnetic radiation and the speed of light in a vacuum. Participants explore the differences between sound waves and light waves, the nature of photons, and the implications of radiation pressure on surfaces.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why kinetic energy in electromagnetic radiation travels at the speed of light, drawing a comparison to sound waves and their dependence on medium.
  • Another participant clarifies that sound waves require a medium to propagate, while light can travel in a vacuum.
  • There is a discussion about how photons can transfer kinetic energy without a medium, with references to the photoelectric effect and the behavior of light on surfaces.
  • One participant asserts that photons do not have mass but possess energy and momentum, challenging the application of classical kinetic energy formulas to photons.
  • Another participant mentions radiation pressure and its effects on suspended surfaces when exposed to laser light, suggesting a formula for calculating this pressure.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of sound and light propagation, the concept of kinetic energy in photons, and the implications of radiation pressure. No consensus is reached on these topics.

Contextual Notes

Some statements rely on assumptions about the nature of mass and energy in photons, and there are unresolved questions regarding the application of classical mechanics to electromagnetic radiation.

David Burke
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
Does anyone have an explanation for why kinetic energy carried by electromagnetic radiation travels at the speed of light?

My understanding of the speed of sound is that the denser the medium, the faster the wave velocity. Since this is just kinetic energy propagating through a medium, how is it different when applied to electromagnetic radiation? If it is no different, does that mean that a vacuum has infinite density?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
you seem to have confusion between sound waves and light waves. when you say electromagnetic radiation, you are talking about light wave. light can travel in vacuum. sound cannot travel in vacuum, it needs medium to propagate.
 
True, sound waves (kinetic energy dispersing through a medium) requires something to travel through. So how can photons transfer kinetic energy (and at such velocity) without a medium. Correct me if I am wrong (very possible) but photons carry kinetic energy as shown by the photo electric effect and the fact that they have mass when not in a rest state. Also, if a laser is directerd onto a suspended metal surface the surface will rotate?
 
David Burke said:
True, sound waves (kinetic energy dispersing through a medium) requires something to travel through. So how can photons transfer kinetic energy (and at such velocity) without a medium. Correct me if I am wrong (very possible) but photons carry kinetic energy as shown by the photo electric effect and the fact that they have mass when not in a rest state. Also, if a laser is directerd onto a suspended metal surface the surface will rotate?

That's just one of the wild things about light, it requires no medium to travel through.

Photons do not have mass, but they do have an energy and momentum (they simply are not given by [itex]KE = {{1}\over{2}}mv^2[/itex] and [itex]p = mv[/itex]).
 
You might have been confused. Sound propagate in vacuum but light can(300,000m/s)
 
David Burke said:
Also, if a laser is directerd onto a suspended metal surface the surface will rotate?
Yes, it will. There's something called radiation pressure.
This pressure of light will be doubled for all angles of incidence if the light is both absorbed and reflected.
However, I think the formula of solar radiation pressure on that page is wrong.It should be F= -p(c+1)Ar
where p is the force per unit area,
c is the coefficient of reflectivity
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 236 ·
8
Replies
236
Views
17K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
6K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K