Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Stanley Huang]

Because before, I said that if the speed of light changes, colour may change.

But Poster He or I said that the colour of light is frequency, not speed, and then, Scott, the admin went on supporting what Poster He or I have said.

And because of your words, I have asked myself this question many times; what is colour? Is colour frequency or is colour the speed of light? Or is it both?

This question may not be simple, because I feel one difficulty may be that light is too fast for us to see, so when I write about light, I am writing about something that is I cannot see, so it may not be easy.

But then, another person asked: “If you cannot see it, then what are you writing about?”

Well, I used the observation of sun; tomorrow have not yet happened, but it is because from past observation, you have seen the sun rises again and again, so you feel it is possible that the sun will rise again the tomorrow, even though tomorrow have not yet happened.

So as light, we cannot see the speed of light because it is too fast, but I feel I can use my past observation to write about the possibility of how light can behave, which may not be easy.

Let me begin with the question: What is frequency? Frequency is how frequent or how many times it appears, right? So if light travels as a wave when it is subjected to external force, the light wave is just like the wave you see in a river or in an ocean.

When you look at a sea, there are many waves. Each wave is like a mountain. And a stream of waves is made up of many mountains. So when there are many waves forming a stream, it is just many mountains. The image I am describing now is perhaps like a picture for you to see what is a light wave.

Now, back to the question: What is frequency? I have said that light travels like a wave in ocean if it is subjected to external force. The frequency of the light wave is dependent on how many waves there are in a fixed distance. So if there are more waves in a fixed distance, then, there is more frequency. If there are less waves in a fixed distance, then, less frequency.

So now, from my descriptions, you have a better picture of waves, frequency and how light travels.

Now, it may be true that if there is a light that hits certain object, the speed of light will change because of the external force. But the question is: If the speed of light changes when it hits an object, will the frequency change?

Yes, it is possible that the frequency may change if light hits an object. Maybe the wavelength may change.

But the thing is: When light hits an object, maybe there is little change to the wavelength, but the speed of light may change much more than the wavelength. And now, if you look at the waves in ocean, if the wavelength is the same, the faster the waves, then, the more frequency, if the wavelength does not change.

So this is why when a light hits an object, maybe there is little change in wavelength, however, the speed of light may change much more than the wavelength, and so there is also more change in the frequency than the wavelength.

But why is it that the wavelength will change a little?

Using the image you see in ocean, you will feel that no matter how fast ocean waves travel, there is always just little change in wavelength, or at least, the proportion of the speed that ocean waves accelerate will always be much larger than the change of wavelength.

Now, if light wave is just like the wave in ocean, so, this is why when light hits an object, there may be little change in the wavelength, but there may be more changes in the speed of light and frequency.

So now, if you have the picture of what I am talking about, you will feel that colour has to do with the speed of light. But is colour the speed of light or is it frequency?

Maybe colour is frequency or density. Why? Because what is colour?

Colour is the characteristic of light, and it can be red, purple, blue, yellow and so on.

So colour is just a characteristic of light. Now, what is the characteristic of light?

The characteristic of light is density, how compressed light is.

So density is how compressed a thing is, and because the characteristic of a thing is how compressed it is, such as the characteristic of gas is less compressed than the characteristic of a solid.

So colour is density, and density is the same as frequency if light travels.

Because if the speed of light does not change, then, the more density, the more frequency.

So colour itself is density, and the colour of light wave can be determined by its frequency.

And because there is little change in wavelength if light changes its speed; if light changes its speed more, then, the more frequency will change.

So even if the speed of light is not colour itself, but, the changes in the speed of light may change the colour of light if it hits an object.

Do you agree?

Secondly, I want to say here, that even though light travels like a wave when it is subjected to external force, light is still a particle, where light waves are made up of particle, so to me, light is still a particle when it travels like a wave. But if light is not subjected to external force; light that is moving in a straight line will move on forever in a straight line if it is not subjected to external force, because of inertia.

Do you agree?

[Eckhart Aurelius Hughes]

This diagram shows what frequency is:

[The extension gif has been deactivated and can no longer be displayed.]

This table shows how frequencies of light line up to colors:

frequency-colors.jpg (76.77 KiB) Viewed 1829 times

[Stanley Huang]

Then that is not hard. LIght wave is just like the wave in ocean. Each time a wave in ocean it hits an object, the water wave will change its speed and because of the change of speed, frequency and wavelength will change.

So as light wave. If a light wave hits an object, the speed of light will change and if the speed of light changes, then, frequency and wavelength also change.

So maybe I was not wrong when I said that that frequency, speed of light and time all depend on one another if they exist.

So if light hits an object, the speed of light must change and because of this, frequency changes and so colour changes.

Now back the question of why the sky is not blue. If a person is not stationary, then the sky is no longer blue, because as he moves relative to the light, not only the speed of light appears to change, but even frequency will change.

Why will frequency change if a person moves faster relative to the speed of light?

This is like if a person moves further away from an object, the object may looks smaller; so if the person moves faster, the wavelength may appear to be different and so as the speed of light, and if the speed of light and wavelength appear to change, then, frequency will change.

So this is why I say that if a person accelerates to high speed, the sky he looks at is no longer blue colour, or at least, the colour will have slightly changed.

But what Einstein is writing about is that he is assuming that there is no external force, and if there is no external force, then, the speed of light is constant.

He is also assuming that the speed of light is not a relative comparison to the motion of the observer.

But if the speed of light is relative to the observer, then, the person who accelerates to high speed will see a certain change in colour of the lofty sky.

[A Poster He or I]

Then that is not hard. LIght wave is just like the wave in ocean. Each time a wave in ocean it hits an object, the water wave will change its speed and because of the change of speed, frequency and wavelength will change.

So as light wave. If a light wave hits an object, the speed of light will change and if the speed of light changes, then, frequency and wavelength also change.

Waves don't change speed, frequency or wavelength when they hit objects: rather, their amplitude decreases (height of the waves) as the objects absorb energy from the wavefront.

Why will frequency change if a person moves faster relative to the speed of light?

This is like if a person moves further away from an object, the object may looks smaller; so if the person moves faster, the wavelength may appear to be different and so as the speed of light, and if the speed of light and wavelength appear to change, then, frequency will change.

So this is why I say that if a person accelerates to high speed, the sky he looks at is no longer blue colour, or at least, the colour will have slightly changed.

Acceleration to high speed changes space and time relative to you, but not light. The compression (or extension) of frequency is merely your relative perception of the light waves being skewed by your own motion, not light's motion. Think of the Doppler shift. The siren drops pitch as the ambulance passes you but it's only your relative perception: you know the siren's absolute pitch is unchanged.

[Stanley Huang]

From what I am saying, you cannot observe what I observe just through debating or words. If person has never seen the moon, not matter how much debating, he still did not see the moon.

What I have said above if you feel there is any problem, words cannot help. Maybe you need observation of experience where words cannot reach, this is where I question logician.

You said: "Waves don't change speed, frequency or wavelength when they hit objects: rather, their amplitude decreases (height of the waves) as the objects absorb energy from the wavefront."

That does not conform to my experience, because it does not conform to force equals mass times acceleration. Waves must change speed if it hits an object, because of the external force. Otherwise force equals mass times acceleration will no longer be describing the situation.

And to me, force equals mass times acceleration does describe the situation where waves change its speed when it hits an object. Why? Observation. If I hit you, you feel a force. So as wave.

If light wave is a wave, then, it is just like the wave in the ocean.

Do not treat Einstein like an idol.

You also said: "Acceleration to high speed changes space and time relative to you, but not light."

That is Einstein's assumption, where he assumes that the speed of light is constant. As I said before, Einstein's idea is based on two assumptions: FIrstly, his assumption that the speed of light is constant and absolute and secondly, his assumption that the laws of nature are the same everywhere."

But he did not prove his assumptions, rather, he just adocated these two assumptions. So these two assumptions are unjustified advocation of Albert Einstein.

But he wanted to do that because he wanted to prove that time is relative. If he wants to prove time is relative, then, what determines time. So Einstein came up with the assumption that the absolute constant nature of light determines time to slow down.

But if time is determined by light, then, what determines light? Einstein did not answer this question. So I said many times that his ideas are only based on the two assumptions above.

But assumption is just an assumption, because firstly, the speed of light is not absolute. Why?

This is not hard. You see red light, white light, blue light, yellow light and perhaps, the light of love if you fall in love.

The light is relative, not absolute. If light is absolute, you can only see one characteristic of light. But you can see many different characteristics of light, such as blue light, yellow light and so on, so, light is not absolute.

Light is relative.

Secondly, is Einstein's assumption that the laws of nature are the same everywhere, again, this may not be true. Because from experimental observation, the observation of the very large is very different to the observation of the very small, when quantum scientists say that the very small behave differently to the very large. So, this is why the laws of nature are the same everywhere.

So what Einstein was doing was he based his ideas on two assumptions above. But assumptions are just assumptions, which he did not justify.

And because what I observe may not conform to the assumptions, and so, in a different situation, Einstein's idea will not work.

[A Poster He or I]

Throw a pebble into a reed-infested pond and observe whether the ripples slow down as they go. It will serve your experience better than your misinterpretations of classical wave mechanics. Oh, and your hand hitting me: wave mechanics doesn't cover that one, so your analogy about force is invalid.

[Stanley Huang]

Have you not heard of force equals mass times acceleration?

If that is so, why would not a light wave slow down when it hits an object?