Don Jusko said:
Thank you Gnosis/barooonscape.
You told me a lot. That most EM spectrums are backward, red should be on the left because it has the lower 400,000,000 MHz and indigo the higher at 700,000,000 MHz (waves per second). The longer wavelength, lower frequency regions are located on the far left of the spectrum and the shorter wavelength, higher frequency regions are on the far right...
Yes, the higher frequency with its associated shorter wavelength makes it seem sort of backwards, and for that reason, it is often a source of confusion/simple error. It’s merely the nature of frequency verses its "cycle duration time". As frequencies increase, their cycle durations must become shorter in time duration in order to produce more cycles per second hence, a higher frequency. In turn, this causes the frequency’s wavelength to become shorter in its physical length (typically measured in meters).
Here’s another angle to view this topic to perhaps shed even greater comprehension…
Let’s examine a 60 Hz frequency. Its cycle time is .016666 seconds. This is derived by:
1 second / 60 Hz = .0166666 second cycle time
Now ask yourself the following question:
“Given .016666 seconds of travel time (the time required to complete a single cycle at 60 Hz), how far could light travel at its light-speed constant of 299,792,458 m/s?”
Answer: 299,792,458 m/s x .0166666 second cycle time = 4,996,341.105 meters
Therefore, the wavelength of a 60 Hz frequency is incredibly long at 4,996,341.105 meters, just under 5 million meters long. Holy Toledo!
Let’s continue this progression…
Now assume the frequency is increased significantly to 1 MHz (therefore, 1,000,000 Hz). A full cycle of a 1 MHz frequency is .000001 seconds and derived by:
1 second / 1,000,000 Hz = .000001 second cycle time
Now ask yourself the same question using the cycle time for 1 MHz:
“Given .000001 seconds of travel time (the time required to complete a single cycle at 1 MHz), how far could light travel at its light-speed constant of 299,792,458 m/s?”
Answer: 299,792,458 m/s x .000001 second cycle time = 299.792458 meters
Now evident by the comparison, as frequency increases, wavelength becomes shorter, as it must. Naturally, this same process continues as frequencies continue to increase.
Now let’s assume a light frequency of 400,000,000,000,000 Hz (roughly the visible red light range). A single full cycle of this ultra high frequency is a mere .0000000000000025 seconds!
1 second / 400,000,000,000,000 Hz = .0000000000000025 second cycle time
Now ask yourself the same question using the cycle time for 400,000,000 MHz:
“Given a mere .0000000000000025 seconds of travel time (the time required to complete a single cycle at 400,000,000 MHz), how far could light travel at its light-speed constant of 299,792,458 m/s?”
With such an incredibly short cycle duration time, light won’t be given a chance to travel very far therefore, the wavelength of this frequency is going to be quite short.
Answer: 299,792,458 m/s x .0000000000000025 second cycle time = .000000749 meters (749 nm)
Summarizing:
The shorter the “cycle duration time” of a frequency, the shorter will be the time afforded for travel at light-speed, which reduces the distance traversed per that cycle duration time thereby shortening the wavelength associated with the frequency.