Does light always travel at light speed?

Click For Summary
Light always travels at its maximum speed, c, in a vacuum, but it slows down when passing through denser media due to electromagnetic interactions with the material's charged particles. This slowing does not contradict the constancy of light speed in a vacuum; rather, it highlights that light's speed is medium-dependent. The refractive index of a material determines how much light slows down, which is influenced by the arrangement of charges within the medium. Gravitational effects on light speed are negligible compared to these electromagnetic effects. Overall, while light maintains its speed in a vacuum, it does not travel at the same speed in all materials.
Zahidur
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
I've been told contradicting ideas about this. I've been told that light doesn't travel at a constant speed everywhere (i.e. light slowing down in speed after entering a more dense medium). However, I've also read that light speed is constant everywhere (i.e. if you could travel close to the speed of light then you would experience warped space-time so light would still travel at light speed relative to you). So which is it or are both these ideas not the whole story?
 
Science news on Phys.org
The speed of light in a vacuum is c. It is reckoned to be the same wherever that region of vacuum is. It travels slower everywhere else. I don't think that is a pair of contradictory statements.
 
Zahidur said:
However, I've also read that light speed is constant everywhere

That applies to plane light waves in vacuum.
 
Oh right, I just thought they contradicted because if light slows down in other objects then it is no longer traveling at light speed (c) but at some lower speed. So light isn't the same speed everywhere (I now get that it's only the same in a vacuum). I know that change in direction in the more dense medium occurs due to the speed change, but why does light slow down in the more dense material. Is it because the object is more dense and therefore space-time is more warped and so it takes longer for light to travel throughout that object or because of some other reason?
 
Zahidur said:
Is it because the object is more dense and therefore space-time is more warped and so it takes longer for light to travel
No. It isn't a Gravitational /GR effect; it's an electromagnetic effect. Dense materials have more densely packed charges which interact with an EM wave going through.
 
It isn't a Gravitational /GR effect

So, is the gravitational effect on the photon too insignificant to be considered (relative to the effect of the electromagnetic force)?
 
Zahidur said:
So, is the gravitational effect on the photon too insignificant to be considered (relative to the effect of the electromagnetic force)?
Of course. How would a low mass piece of glass hope to slow light down to 0.6c by relativistic effects?
The Refractive Index of a material is to do with the arrangement of charges. This was explained long before GR came on the scene.
 
  • #10
Zahidur said:
Oh right, I just thought they contradicted because if light slows down in other objects then it is no longer traveling at light speed (c) but at some lower speed. So light isn't the same speed everywhere (I now get that it's only the same in a vacuum).
A more precise statement would be "light isn't the same speed through all materials". It is the same in any inertial space through a vacuum. And I believe it would be the same through the same material in any inertial reference space.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
Aight sfe.
 
  • #12
Zahidur said:
Aight sfe.
I had to look that one up. turns out it probably wasn't a typo.
 
  • #13
FactChecker said:
And I believe it would be the same through the same material in any inertial reference space.
I don't think that's right. Wouldn't it follow the usual formulas for transforming velocity between different reference frames?
 
  • #14
Redbelly98 said:
I don't think that's right. Wouldn't it follow the usual formulas for transforming velocity between different reference frames?
I was thinking that there should be no way for any inertial frame to detect an effect of its motion. So measuring the speed of light through any material would be the same as if it was stationary. That is what I meant to say. I think that must be right.
 
  • #15
Redbelly98 said:
FactChecker said:
And I believe it would be the same through the same material in any inertial reference space.
I don't think that's right. Wouldn't it follow the usual formulas for transforming velocity between different reference frames?
Yes, as experimentally confirmed by Fizeau in 1851 (approximately, for low speeds).
 
  • #16
FactChecker said:
I was thinking that there should be no way for any inertial frame to detect an effect of its motion. So measuring the speed of light through any material would be the same as if it was stationary. That is what I meant to say. I think that must be right.
If you mean the speed of light through a given material relative to an inertial frame in which the material is at rest, then, yes, that will be constant.
 
  • #17
DrGreg said:
If you mean the speed of light through a given material relative to an inertial frame in which the material is at rest, then, yes, that will be constant.

Only if the medium is homogeneous and isotropic.
 
  • #18
DrStupid said:
Only if the medium is homogeneous and isotropic.
Yes, I was assuming that, too.
 
  • #19
DrGreg said:
If you mean the speed of light through a given material relative to an inertial frame in which the material is at rest, then, yes, that will be constant.
Yes. That is what I meant: relative to an inertial frame in which the material is at rest
 
  • #20
Zahidur said:
I've been told contradicting ideas about this. I've been told that light doesn't travel at a constant speed everywhere (i.e. light slowing down in speed after entering a more dense medium). However, I've also read that light speed is constant everywhere (i.e. if you could travel close to the speed of light then you would experience warped space-time so light would still travel at light speed relative to you). So which is it or are both these ideas not the whole story?
Light always travels at light speed. But light speed is given by c=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\epsilon\mu}} and thus varies with the medium i travels through. In vacuum, with \epsilon =\epsilon_{0} and \mu =\mu_{0}, you get the often-cited value of c (or should we say c0) = 299792458 m/s.
 
  • #21
Svein said:
Light always travels at light speed.

That applies to plane waves but light waves don't need to be plane.
 
  • #22
DrStupid said:
That applies to plane waves but light waves don't need to be plane.
Actually, I was stating a tautology (of course light is traveling at light speed - by definition). The problem is to relate "light speed" to other speeds and measurement systems.
 
  • #23
Zahidur said:
I've been told contradicting ideas about this. I've been told that light doesn't travel at a constant speed everywhere (i.e. light slowing down in speed after entering a more dense medium). However, I've also read that light speed is constant everywhere (i.e. if you could travel close to the speed of light then you would experience warped space-time so light would still travel at light speed relative to you). So which is it or are both these ideas not the whole story?

D. Giovannini, J. Romero, V. Potoček, G. Ferenczi, F. Speirits, S.M. Barnett, D. Faccio, M.J. Padgett,
Spatially structured photons that travel in free space slower than the speed of light,
Science 347 (2015) 857-860).
 
  • #24
Svein said:
Actually, I was stating a tautology (of course light is traveling at light speed - by definition).

Actually, reality is not that simple.
 
  • Like
Likes Buckleymanor
  • #25
DrStupid said:
Actually, reality is not that simple.
Neither is a medium,show me a medium that is both homogeneous and isotropic and it will probably turn out to be a felt hat.
 
  • #26
PFfan01 said:
D. Giovannini, J. Romero, V. Potoček, G. Ferenczi, F. Speirits, S.M. Barnett, D. Faccio, M.J. Padgett,
Spatially structured photons that travel in free space slower than the speed of light,
Science 347 (2015) 857-860).
At Harvard in 1998, the speed of light was slowed down to 38 miles per hour!
 
  • #27
rude man said:
At Harvard in 1998, the speed of light was slowed down to 38 miles per hour!

But that was in an Bose-Einstein condensate and not in free space.
 
  • #28
DrStupid said:
But that was in an Bose-Einstein condensate and not in free space.
So?
 
  • #29
Svein said:
Light always travels at light speed. But light speed is given by c=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\epsilon\mu}} and thus varies with the medium i travels through. In vacuum, with \epsilon =\epsilon_{0} and \mu =\mu_{0}, you get the often-cited value of c (or should we say c0) = 299792458 m/s.
Every medium consists of 99,99999... % vacuum. So, what happens when the light travels inside these "vast areas" of vacuum (as it travels inside this material)? Is its speed slower than c? (And if yes then how is this possible?)
 
  • #30
George K said:
Every medium consists of 99,99999... % vacuum. So, what happens when the light travels inside these "vast areas" of vacuum (as it travels inside this material)? Is its speed slower than c? (And if yes then how is this possible?)
See the link in post #5.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 93 ·
4
Replies
93
Views
5K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
16K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K