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

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.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...
Back
Top