Is this correct? Visible light refers to the visible light section of the spectrum and light generally means the rest of the spectrum?
Why do so many websites describe the whole electromagnetic spectrum as light then? Am I complicating things too much or am I interpreting it wrong? All the electromagnetic spectrum is also photons right? And photons are said to be light? :/
As it's all electromagnetic radiation you can call it as such, our for the lazy ones: light. But this is unusual. You don't come home from the dentist and tell he has lightened you if he took an X-ray of your teeth, don't you?This comes and goes with the word "usually".
LOL! That made me laugh thank you.As it's all electromagnetic radiation you can call it as such, our for the lazy ones: light. But this is unusual. You don't come home from the dentist and tell he has lightened you if he took an X-ray of your teeth, don't you?
Because natural language is not a completely precise way of stating ideas. It may be usual to restrict the word "light" to the visible part of the electromagnetic spectrum, but not everyone is going to consistently do what's usual. It often doesn't matter, but when it does you may have to determine from the context what is intended.Why do so many websites describe the whole electromagnetic spectrum as light then?
The relationship between photons and electromagnetic radiation is much more complicated than any popular source would suggest. Generally it is unnecessary and even confusing to use the concept of photons in any discussion not involving quantum mechanical phenomena; but if you want to learn more you might try this thread and especially the links in the first two posts: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/what-is-a-photon.879128/#post-5522356All the electromagnetic spectrum is also photons right? And photons are said to be light? :/
Why do so many websites describe the whole electromagnetic spectrum as light then?
if they do, then they are wrong .... show some examples .... maybe you are misinterpretingam I interpreting it wrong?
not quite worded correctly and this is your misunderstanding. Photons are just the energy carriers in an electromagnetic waveAll the electromagnetic spectrum is also photons right?
other way around ( and with the basic definition I just gave above) ....And photons are said to be light? :/
Paragraphif they do, then they are wrong .... show some examples .... maybe you are misinterpreting
yeah ... very bad wording and probably not what would be called a reputable source of info"The electromagnetic spectrum is all of the different forms of light radiation, put in order from lowest energy to highest energy. All of these forms of radiation travel at the speed of light, but only some of them are visible."
You could also ask why so many websites offer perpetual motion machines, health tonics and faster then light travel. The www needs to be approached with care and you need peer review and common sense before accepting anything you read.Why do so many websites describe the whole electromagnetic spectrum as light then?
Perfect! This is number two on the list of properties needed to improve knowledge: skepticism! (Number one is curiosity.)I just don't know what to believe anymore.
We may not forget their goal. Here common people are addressed and it's probably the shortest way to explain what EM radiation really is: visible and invisible light. It's not meant to be scientifically rigorous. How would you explain microwaves, X-rays, radio signals, IR radiation and so on and so on if it has to be brief, understandable to everyone and a side note, because the purpose of the webpage is a different one, in this case astronomical observations and conclusions. The alternative would be either a large detour or not easy to understand and in any case: longer. It is as wrong as saying an ultrasound examination is by sound or elephants' communication is by sound (infrasound), dog whistles uses sound (although neither can be heard by us) and similar. They all are a kind of sound, although they don't make a sound. That's the same with light. All the same electromagnetic radiation: some is visible to us, why we usually call it light, some is visible to bees, although we don't, with some we heat our meals, open car doors and switch tvs and others we use for medical purposes. It's up to everybody to make that distinction (visible=light - invisible=rest of the spectrum) or not. If you don't, chances are high to be misunderstood. But it can abbreviate a longer course which is done on the NASA page, just because they do not want to hold a lecture on EM radiation there. They even start by telling it's the same but eventually invisible!"All electromagnetic radiation is light, but we can only see a small portion of this radiation—the portion we call visible light."
You really shouldn't worry about stuff like this. You have to remember Nasa is addressing a broad range of people and many of them would switch off at the term Electromagnetic Radiation. "Radiation" means "BAD" to many people.Nasa saying that all electromagnetic radiation was light on there webpage
All of the electromagnetic spectrum consists of photons. The word photon suggests light because of its historical origins involving the photo-electric effect. That leads to some confusion regarding the whole spectrum. But loosely, I think one can talk about UV light, IR light but I wouldn't talk about X-ray light or gamma-ray light or even microwave light. I'd use the word radiation in those cases.Could you get away with saying that all the electromagnetic spectrum is light? Or would that be bad interpretation?