Is there a limit to frequency?

[Vanadium 50]

This thread does have a precise answer. It's simply that you refuse to accept it. Electromagnetic wave frequency is a frame dependent quantity, so you can always find a frame where it's bigger.

 

[Orion1]

Vanadium 50, I have a theoretical disagreement with this Wikipedia statement:

Very high-frequency photons, which cycle at once per Planck time or faster, could potentially swallow themselves up in black holes from their own energy density, which would make it difficult or impossible to probe this time scale. In the quantum theory, this would mean that the Planck time should be the smallest unit of time physics can reason about in a meaningful way.

The principle of mass-energy_equivalence cannot be invoked here because the photon does not have any rest mass, and a Planck mass is not a particle in the Standard Model, therefore there is no QED channel available for a photon to generate a Planck mass, therefore a photons energy density, regardless of photon energy magnitude, cannot cause space-time to curve and absorb itself into its own Schwarzschild radius as a Planck mass particle.

I also disagree that Planck time is the smallest unit of time quantization, it is merely a product resulting from the criteria of defining the gravitational radius equivalent to Compton wavelength for mass particles. The General Relativity space-time manifold is still smooth at Planck scales.
$$r_G = \overline{\lambda}_C$$

What are the PF Science Advisors theoretical position regarding these statements?
[/Color]
Reference:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_time#Physical_significance"

 

[pgardn]

I had also wondered about this, limits for f or wavelength.
But unfortunately do not have the background to understand it fully.

So my general physics is lacking... SchnIkes.

I will stick with the frames of reference answer in case I get asked.