Does the speed of light imply ....

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The speed of light (c) is a characteristic of electromagnetic (EM) radiation, but it does not imply that all components of the electromagnetic spectrum are classified as light. Light is specifically defined as EM radiation within the visible spectrum, approximately 400-700 nm. While all EM radiation propagates at the speed of light, the term "light" should be used with caution to avoid confusion regarding its definition. Additionally, gravitational waves also travel at the speed of light, although they are not classified as electromagnetic waves.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of electromagnetic spectrum terminology
  • Knowledge of the properties of light and its wavelength range
  • Familiarity with the concept of speed of light in a vacuum
  • Basic principles of relativity and its implications on wave propagation
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the electromagnetic spectrum and its various components
  • Study the properties of light and its definition in physics
  • Explore the implications of Einstein's theory of relativity on wave propagation
  • Investigate the characteristics of gravitational waves and their speed
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, educators, students in physics, and anyone interested in the properties of light and electromagnetic radiation.

finney
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
Does the speed of light imply that in its property as a wave it encompasses the entire known electromagnetic spectrum?
Does the speed of light imply that in its property as a wave it encompasses the entire known electromagnetic spectrum?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you asking whether all components of the EM spectrum propagate at the speed of light? If so, the answer is yes.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and russ_watters
no. I am wondering if all the components of the EM spectrum are what we know of as light?
 
finney said:
no. I am wondering if all the components of the EM spectrum are what we know of as light?
No. Light is EM radiation with a wavelength in a particular range (about 400-700nm). There's no difference between light and other EM radiation apart from the wavelength (and frequency), but light is by definition only the stuff we can see with our eyes.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71, russ_watters and topsquark
Ibix said:
No. Light is EM radiation with a wavelength in a particular range (about 400-700nm). There's no difference between light and other EM radiation apart from the wavelength (and frequency), but light is by definition only the stuff we can see with our eyes.
I think qualifying the particular range of the spectrum as "visible light" instead of just "light", is more descriptive of what one is talking about. As we know, all EM radiation propagates at the speed of light. Calling the visible component just "light" might make one wonder why this particular range of the spectrum is singled out and whether radiation in the other ranges does not propagate at the same speed. It seems that this is the gist of OP's question. Indeed if one googles "EM spectrum/images", one gets variants of this with "visible" instead of "light" in the visible range.

EM_Spectrum.png
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71, malawi_glenn, russ_watters and 2 others
kuruman said:
It seems that this is the gist of OP's question.
Maybe. I'm still not sure. Perhaps the OP will add some clarity.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark
finney said:
Does the speed of light imply that in its property as a wave it encompasses the entire known electromagnetic spectrum?
As others have said, your question is not clear but as I interpret it, no, the speed of light does not imply what you think it implies. it IS true that the entire EM spectrum is "light" in its most general sense ** and it is true that it all travels at c, but it is NOT true that the speed "c" implies the spectrum, it is a characteristic of the spectrum.

** As @Ibix pointed out, there is a more restrictive definition of the word "light" which includes only that part of the spectrum visible to the human eye.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and topsquark
It's a little loose to say "the speed of light". It would be more precise to say "the speed of propagation of electromagnetic radiation in a vacuum" but that is a bit of a mouthful.

Albert Einstein considered the possibility that different wavelengths traveled at different speeds. At the time it was clear it wasn't true for visible light. If it were, far away stars would appear as a streak instead of a dot. "Everything would be all mixed up!" quoth he. [I imagine he considered the question in more depth than have I].
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark
finney said:
Summary: Does the speed of light imply that in its property as a wave it encompasses the entire known electromagnetic spectrum?

Does the speed of light imply that in its property as a wave it encompasses the entire known electromagnetic spectrum?
It may be worth noting that gravitational waves travel at the speed of light in a vacuum (c) but they are not electromagnetic waves.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jbriggs444, topsquark and Ibix
  • #10
Hornbein said:
It's a little loose to say "the speed of light". It would be more precise to say "the speed of propagation of electromagnetic radiation in a vacuum" but that is a bit of a mouthful.

Albert Einstein considered the possibility that different wavelengths traveled at different speeds. At the time it was clear it wasn't true for visible light. If it were, far away stars would appear as a streak instead of a dot. "Everything would be all mixed up!" quoth he. [I imagine he considered the question in more depth than have I].
A better name would be "the limiting speed of relativity", because the essence of relativity is that there is a limiting speed. That electromagnetic waves in vacuo have this speed of propagation is an empirical fact, i.e., that the em. field is precisely massless. The current upper limit of this "photon mass" is ##10^{-18} \text{eV}##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
621
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
1K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
4K