Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: Jonah Thomas <jethomas5@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2009 03:45:36 -0400
"Inertial" <relatively@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Jonah Thomas" <jethomas5@xxxxxxxxx> wrote
"Inertial" <relatively@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Androcles" <Headmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
call> light is a totally different concept from the set EMIt can only send a pulse. Imagine all you want to, there are NO
light waves.
Radio waves, yes, but no light waves.
OMG .. Androcles thinks that the set frequency of EM radition we
frequencies we> call radio waves? He's GOT to be joking.
and> being particles happens?
BAHAHAHA
If not .. I wonder where he thinks the change between being waves
Androcles has training in electrical engineering, so he quite likely
understands how radio waves are produced.
Who knows what he knows
Radio waves are just EM radiation .. the distinction between different
names 'types' of EMR is arbitrary .. just different sets of
frequencies.
I agree and I expect Androcles agrees with your idea -- that it's all
EMR and the frequencies are different.
He gave the explanation that radio waves are like a tsunami while
light waves are like something else -- a faucet dripping?
No .. he was just being a smart arse.
The only difference is frequency.
Both water moving, but different forms.
Its the same form, just different frequency
My guess at where he's heading with that is that light waves are
typically made by atoms, by electrons falling to lower shells or
whatever the wording is. (You can get light without quite that, with
atoms heated to white heat.) Radio waves are made by electrons
accelerated back and forth, typically inside hunks of metal or in
waveguides. A whole lot of electrons moving without much regard to
the atoms they move among. It's different. The electrons that are
used to make radio waves can keep oscillating back and forth as long
as you supply the power. The atoms that make light make one quantum
at a time(or maybe it's two) but they can't do it again until they
get their electrons knocked up again.
You can make light and other EMR waves in a number of different ways.
There is no fundamental difference between them EXCEPT frequency.
I think it's the nonfundamental difference he's talking about. You can
make radio waves with a radio transmitter, and they are waves. The
electrons move back and forth continuously and they generate a
continuous wave.
But visible light is made by individual atoms that each make a small
quantum of light that starts and ends quickly. No continuing wave.
He's talking about how they are made and the difference between them
because of how they are made.
I may have misunderstood him, but this is what I think he's saying, not
that there's a fundamental difference but that there's a difference in
practice.
.So it's different.
Only in terms of frequency
So electrons fall to their new levels and if it takes
one cycle for that to happen you get a one-cycle event. If it takes
fifty cycles then you get a 50-cycle event, that's more wavelike
than the short one. How long does it take? I don't know but likely
somebody knows.
The only difference is frequency.
Of course, they he and Henry may be confusing radio waves with
broadcasting signals (eg sound) using a radio wave as a carrier. In
which case the frequency of the carrier is modulated (ie changed over
time) by the sound, and then demodulated at the receiver. Or (in the
older AM radios, for example) it is a modulation (ie change) in the
amplitude of the carrier wave that is used.
One can do the same sort of modulation with other EM waves (or other
sorts of waves), as long as the carrier frequency is higher enough
than the frequency of the signal you are modulating it with. Radio
frequencies and wavelengths are just a practical and convenient range
to use.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: Androcles
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: Inertial
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- References:
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: Jonah Thomas
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: Henry Wilson, DSc
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: Jonah Thomas
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: Henry Wilson, DSc
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: Inertial
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: J Thomas
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: Henry Wilson, DSc
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: Jonah Thomas
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: Henry Wilson, DSc
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: Jonah Thomas
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: Henry Wilson, DSc
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: Jonah Thomas
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: Androcles
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: Jonah Thomas
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: Androcles
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: Inertial
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: Jonah Thomas
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- From: Inertial
- Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- Prev by Date: Re: AE vs AE
- Next by Date: Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- Previous by thread: Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- Next by thread: Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|