Looking at the refractive index of glass, it's around 1.6.
Then the speed of light x through light should be given by 1.6=3.0×108x,
The frequency is kept constant, so the wavelength must adapt to suit the slower speed, giving a wavelength of 2/3 the original.
Does this mean that when passing through glass, say red light (wavelength 650 nm) changes to indigo (445 nm), as 650×2/3=433 nm, or is my logic flawed somewhere?
Answer
What do you take to define "red" light: a wavelength of 650 nm or a frequency of 460 THz? On the one hand, this borders on being an ill-defined question, but I suppose it can be massaged into something answerable.
I would argue that frequency is more fundamental to describing the light. After all, it is the frequency that is constant throughout all this, as you noted. When a photon strikes a receptor in your eye, it doesn't matter whether it did so after just passing through glass or through vacuum - the biochemical response is dictated by the frequency/energy of the photon. Thus it would be more appropriate to say red light stays red, but the wavelength corresponding to red shifts in glass.
No comments:
Post a Comment