If EM waves travel forever, why do things get dimmer as they get further away?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the phenomenon of why electromagnetic (EM) waves appear dimmer as they travel further from their source. Participants explore various factors influencing this perception, including wave propagation, energy dissipation, and the effects of distance on intensity. The conversation encompasses conceptual reasoning and technical explanations related to light intensity and observation.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that light appears dimmer due to nearby light pollution and the random noise affecting our perception and sensors.
  • Others argue that the spreading of EM waves results in a decrease in intensity, as energy per unit area diminishes with distance, following the inverse square law.
  • One participant mentions that EM waves can lose energy as they spread out, but challenges the notion of air friction affecting light, clarifying that light is not a physical material.
  • There is a discussion about whether the photons themselves stretch or if they simply spread out away from each other, with some emphasizing that photons do not have a physical size.
  • A metaphor involving marbles being dropped and spreading out is used to illustrate how photons behave as they travel away from a source, impacting how many reach an observer.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the mechanisms behind the dimming of light, with some emphasizing the role of distance and energy dissipation while others focus on external factors like light pollution and noise. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specific contributions of these factors.

Contextual Notes

Some claims depend on interpretations of wave behavior and the nature of photons, which may not be universally agreed upon. The discussion includes various assumptions about the interaction of light with the environment and the observer's perception.

jaydnul
Messages
558
Reaction score
15
Other than nearby light pollution. Or is that the only reason?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Things also appear dimmer from further because the waves are more 'spread out', imagine a sphere with lines coming straight from the center, the further out you get, the more distance between those lines.
 
so, wave propagation dissipates over distance becoming space "noise". there are many ways EMR can dissipate. conservation of energy rules still apply.

you are questioning the intensity of the observation. infinite distance requires infinitely sized detector.
 
Last edited:
The energy of any section of an EM wave falls off with the inverse square of the distance. IE as you double the distance from the emitter, the energy is now 1/4 of what it was. Quadruple the distance and it's 1/16th as much. The energy of the entire wavefront MUST stay equal, so as the wavefront expands it now takes up more area, so the energy per unit area MUST drop.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_square_law
 
lundyjb said:
Other than nearby light pollution. Or is that the only reason?

Nearby light pollution is very relevant along with the random noise in our eyes and in image sensors. They all serve to dilute the light energy reaching us from a distant source and reduce the information we get about it. The expression is Signal to Noise Ratio and it gets worse and worse as the received signal gets weaker.
 
completely prepetual motion is impossible.

the EMs rub against air friction to and that dulls the effect
 
JKGlover said:
completely prepetual motion is impossible.

the EMs rub against air friction to and that dulls the effect

This is entirely incorrect. EM waves travel until they are absorbed by something but the wave loses energy as it spreads out.
The light can be scattered by air, but in the absence of something to scatter it the wave still loses intensity and appears dimmer.
This isn't air friction either. Air friction occurs when a physical material is moving through air or the air is moving over it. Light is not a physical material.
 
Drakkith said:
This is entirely incorrect. EM waves travel until they are absorbed by something but the wave loses energy as it spreads out.
The light can be scattered by air, but in the absence of something to scatter it the wave still loses intensity and appears dimmer.
This isn't air friction either. Air friction occurs when a physical material is moving through air or the air is moving over it. Light is not a physical material.

When you say the light spreads out, do you mean the photons themselves are stretching out or the photons are spreading out away from each other?
 
lundyjb said:
When you say the light spreads out, do you mean the photons themselves are stretching out or the photons are spreading out away from each other?

If anything say the photons are spreading out away from each other. Remember that photons are not matter particles and you cannot associate a physical "size" to them. They don't stretch out or compress. They are simply the interaction of the EM wave with matter. Even when thinking about redshift/blueshift you cannot say that the photons are stretched or compressed, but that the EM wave itself is a different frequency.
 
  • #10
imagine a bunch of marbles being dropped together onto the floor. Like you dumped them out all at once from a bag (no bouncing >.>)

they will at start at the middle, and spread out in all directions. At first they will all be pretty close to each other, but as they continue to head away from where you dropped them, they are further apart from each other.

Photons act in pretty much the same way, except there are A LOT of them. The light that you see is a constant stream of some bunch of photons that are hitting your eye.

In the marble case, your eye would be like a dust pan that is set on the floor in the way of the marbles. Closer to where you dumped them, the dust pan would pick up a bunch of them. As you move the dust pan further away, it would pick up fewer and fewer of them.

So as we get further away from a source of photons, our eyes pick up fewer and fewer of them.
 
  • #11
I like that explanation SHISHKABOB :)

hopefully that will get the idea across
I was thinking of waterdroplets out of a single hole sprinkler and how they spread out
Dave
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K