Frequency: What is it? Questions about Frequency, Doppler Effect and Mass

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter okkvlt
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Frequency
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of frequency, its intrinsic nature, and its implications in the context of the Doppler effect, light, and mass. Participants explore the relationship between frequency and energy, as well as the effects of relative motion on frequency perception in both light and matter.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how frequency, described as an intrinsic property, can be affected by relative motion, particularly in light waves compared to sound waves.
  • Concerns are raised about the implications of redshift and blueshift on the energy of photons, specifically regarding the source of missing or additional energy during these shifts.
  • A hypothesis is proposed suggesting a potential relationship between mass and frequency, indicating they might be different manifestations of the same underlying concept.
  • Another participant advises against using relativistic mass when discussing photons and suggests using the energy-momentum relation instead.
  • One participant provides an analogy involving ripples in water to illustrate how frequency can be perceived differently depending on the observer's motion.
  • Frequency is defined by multiple participants as the number of occurrences of a repeating event per unit time, emphasizing its relativity based on the observer's position.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of frequency, its relationship to energy, and the appropriateness of using relativistic mass in discussions about photons. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of defining frequency in relation to different observers and the implications of energy conservation during the Doppler effect. There are unresolved questions regarding the definitions and relationships between mass, frequency, and energy.

okkvlt
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
Some questions about frequency, doppler effect, and mass.


What exactly is frequency? I know its an intrinsic property, but there are a few things that don't make sence.

How can light waves be stretched out or compressed by the doppler effect if frequency is intrinsic? It makes sense with sound waves- the wave is composed of many air particles, so the wave can be compressed by moving the high pressure and low pressure areas together. But i see no way that an intrinsic property such as frequency can be affected by relative motion.
Also, high frequency photons are high energy, and low frequency photons are low energy. So when light is red shifted, what happens to the missing energy? And when light is blue shifted, where did the extra energy come from? nowhere? The doppler effect makes no sense!

Matter has frequency too. So, if you are moving toward a matter particle, then the frequency of the particle is increasing. And vice versa. So does the doppler effect exist with matter as well?



Another thing:
The energy of a lightwave is given by e=nhf
where n is number of photons, h is Plancks constant, and f is frequency.

The conversion rate of matter to energy is e=mc^2

so, the relationship between mass-energy of a matter particle and light-energy of a photon is mc^2=nhf.

Now think about it. m is to f as h is to c^2.
Why? Because mass and frequency are measures of energy, while h-bar and the speed of light are constants. (n is simply the number of photons, which really doesn't matter because by reducing the number of photons to 1 and increasing frequency you would still see the relation between the energy of a single photon and the energy of a single matter particle of a given mass.)
Does anybody else find this very interesting?

Does this mean there is some kind of relationship between mass and frequency? Perhaps mass and frequency are different manifestations of the same thing.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You probably shouldn't use the relativistic mass when you talk about photons. Use [itex]E^2=\vec pc^2+m^2c^4[/itex] instead, where m is the rest mass. The reason I don't like the idea of relativistic mass when we're talking about massless particles is that the only way to define it is to put the left-hand side of the equation above equal to "relativistic mass"2c4. That's pretty pointless. That concept makes more sense for massive particles when you can define it as [itex]\gamma m[/itex].

As for the frequency... Suppose e.g. that you throw a rock into a pond and watch the ripples. If you're in the water, you will se a certain number of peaks pass you in (say) ten seconds, but if your brother is in a balloon above your head, drifting slowly past you with the wind, he will see a different number of peaks pass him in the same time. So you will disagree about the frequency. (Remember that the frequency is just the number of times something happens in a certain time).
 
Frequency is the the number of "ups" and "downs" that occur per measure of time. It is all relative depending on where you are and how you observe it. Observations of frequency are different at different locations. That is why the Doppler effect works as it does.
 
Frequency is a measure of the number of occurrences of a repeating event per unit time. The event can be anything.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 78 ·
3
Replies
78
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K