Max Frequency at the Speed of Light: Clarifying a Puzzling Concept

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of maximum frequency in relation to the speed of light, particularly whether there is a limit to frequency due to the constraints of light's propagation speed. Participants explore the implications of frequency and amplitude in the context of light as a wave, touching on classical electromagnetism and the dual nature of light.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether there is a maximum frequency associated with the speed of light, suggesting that at infinite frequency, a wave would need to be at every amplitude simultaneously, which seems impossible.
  • Another participant asserts that light should not be considered as a particle with amplitude, implying that amplitude is irrelevant to understanding light's behavior.
  • A participant acknowledges the dual nature of light and seeks clarification on the meaning of frequency and amplitude in the context of light as a wave rather than a particle.
  • One participant reflects on the idea that a 60 Hz light wave would have to propagate slower than a 1 Hz light wave, leading to confusion about the implications of frequency on propagation speed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion contains multiple competing views regarding the relationship between frequency, amplitude, and the speed of light. There is no consensus on the implications of these concepts.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the definitions and implications of frequency and amplitude in the context of light, and there are unresolved questions about how these concepts interact with the speed of light.

TheAnalogKid
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Hi, I have wanted to ask someone this for so long, but I know its stupid.

Is there a maximum frequency as a side effect of a maximum speed of light?
Thinking of light as a pure wave and at a fixed amplitude, it is going to have to travel the distance dictated by the amplitude and frequency, and as the frequency increases, its going to have to travel faster to reach that amplitude.

At infinite frequency, wouldn't the wave have to be at every amplitude at the same time?? This sounds impossible. It seems that the amplitude/frequency combination cannot result in a propagation speed faster than the speed of light. .

Can someone clarify this and tell me where my mind is stuck lol
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Nope. The thing to understand is that light isn't a particle wobbling up and down. So amplitude is immediately irrelevant.
 
well I'm aware of the dual nature of light as a particle/wave, although not too refreshed on it. But what does a frequency and amplitude mean to the light if it is not a particle??
 
TheAnalogKid said:
well I'm aware of the dual nature of light as a particle/wave, although not too refreshed on it. But what does a frequency and amplitude mean to the light if it is not a particle??
In classical electromagnetism it's just a periodic oscillation in the strength of the electric and magnetic field vectors--see http://www.monos.leidenuniv.nl/smo/index.html?basics/light.htm , or look at the animated java applet here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ok thanks, this helps. And thinking about it now, a 60 Hz light wave would actually have to propagate slower than a 1Hz light wave, with both traveling at C by my reasoning, and that makes no sense.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
4K