Message boards :
Number crunching :
amplitude vs wavelength...light
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 · 2
Author | Message |
---|---|
![]() Send message Joined: 2 Sep 04 Posts: 378 Credit: 10,765 RAC: 0 |
In reply to the 'amplitude is in another dimension' people... Don't forget that you can have polarized light just by passing it through a line grating etched on glass (which is polarizing filter on a camera or sunglasses) Altering a RF wave by passing it through a physical object implies that the wave itself is in your 3 physical dimensions. If you look at RF websites, you will see that Radio waves can be polarized as well ( google polarized radio ) I'm not the LHC Alex. Just a number cruncher like everyone else here. |
![]() Send message Joined: 2 Sep 04 Posts: 378 Credit: 10,765 RAC: 0 |
<blockquote>split beam: http://www.fortunecity.com/emachines/e11/86/qphil.html Why don't they say that light could be coming off in waves, even though they are particles? Exactly like water waves are waves of molecules? They do say that there are so many particles, and happens so fast, that the electron could give off a continuous spiral wave, in all directions, and that there are so many, any direction still sees a normal looking wave in our time scale? (again, the unaccepted answer: Cause their not as smart as you, duh. :)</blockquote> The shorter the wavelength, the more it 'acts like' a particle in that it goes in a straight line. I'm not the LHC Alex. Just a number cruncher like everyone else here. |
![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 17 Sep 04 Posts: 150 Credit: 20,315 RAC: 0 |
You have a link where it is accepted, by everyone, that it is a wave? ----------------------- Click to see my tag My tag SNAFU'ed? Turn the Page! :D |
![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 17 Sep 04 Posts: 150 Credit: 20,315 RAC: 0 |
I see it now. What ever is vibrating is the particle. It's vibration is the wave. Now what do they say is vibrating? Are we back to Flux? addit: according to this: http://www.astronomynotes.com/light/s2.htm I think they have them in the wrong synch. A magnetic field is created by a change in electric field/current(hope those 2 are interchangeable here), so the magnetic field should be peaking as the electric field is passing through 0. addit 2: - and now I can accept one being zero as it's couple is then maxed. ----------------------- Click to see my tag My tag SNAFU'ed? Turn the Page! :D |
Send message Joined: 1 Sep 04 Posts: 506 Credit: 118,619 RAC: 0 |
Let's get this straight: Light is neither wave nor particle, but it has properties of both. An analogy: I have a young son. He's very fit and agile. He swims like a fish, and he climbs like a monkey. I'm not saying he is a fish or monkey, just that he behaves sometimes like one or other. An attempt to understand light as a vibrating particle is akin to understanding my son as a tree-climbing fish. BTW - this thread should really be in Cafe LHC, shouldn't it? Gaspode the UnDressed http://www.littlevale.co.uk |
©2025 CERN