Does the speed of light imply ....

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
9 replies · 2K views
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?
 
on Phys.org
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
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