Understanding Wavelength & Frequency: c vs. v

AI Thread Summary
The discussion clarifies the difference between the equations f = v/λ and f = c/λ, noting that 'c' is used for light in a vacuum while 'v' applies to particles or waves at any velocity. It addresses the confusion around using 'c' for other electromagnetic waves, confirming its applicability. The conversation also explores why short wavelengths may penetrate deeper than long wavelengths, emphasizing that penetration depends on the material and its surface conditions rather than a universal rule. An example of ordinary glass illustrates that while it transmits visible light, it blocks UV light, which has a shorter wavelength. Overall, the penetration of wavelengths is complex and varies significantly across different materials.
Air
Messages
202
Reaction score
0
Hello, I confused as there are 2 very similar equation but I do not know when to use each of them. They are:

f = \frac{v}{\lambda} and f = \frac{c}{\lambda}.

What is the difference between c and v and when can the appropriate one be used? :confused:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Er... one is for a particle or wave at any velocity v, while the other is when v=c (i.e. light in vacuum).

Zz.
 
Also, can c also be used when we are considering other source of waves (e.g. electromagnetic spectrum)?
 
When I use the word "light", I do mean the EM wave, not just "visible light".

Zz.
 
Why do short wavelengths usually penetrate deeper then long wavelengths ?
(I know it has more energy, but I'm looking for more detailed explanation after reading the FAQ).
 
GT1 said:
Why do short wavelengths usually penetrate deeper then long wavelengths ?
(I know it has more energy, but I'm looking for more detailed explanation after reading the FAQ).
Said that way it's not true, in general: it depends on material, its surface conditions, and on the range of frequencies; in some cases it could be the opposite.
 
lightarrow said:
Said that way it's not true, in general: it depends on material, its surface conditions, and on the range of frequencies; in some cases it could be the opposite.

So if choose randomly 10000 materials only on 50% of the cases the short wavelengths will penetrate deeper ?
 
GT1 said:
So if choose randomly 10000 materials only on 50% of the cases the short wavelengths will penetrate deeper ?

Look at one of the most common material on hand - ordinary, transparent glass that you can buy at a store. It allows for the transmission of almost all visible light spectrum, but it doesn't allow UV to penetrate. And UV has a shorter wavelength than visible light.

Your question can't be answered because almost all materials have a finite bandwidth of absorption and/or transmission. This means that there isn't usually a "trend". While some wavelengths smaller than something may get transmitted, other that are smaller or longer may not.

Zz.
 
Back
Top