If the frequency of light is it's energy then why don't lower frequecncies of light travel at slower speeds?
916041
The energy contained is indeed a function of it's frequency and Einstein actually won a Nobel for his work on the photoelectric effect which is  a result of that relationship. The lower the frequency, the longer the wavelength, the lower the energy in the wave. There is no relationship between the speed of light and it's energy content. The speed is determined by two electromagnetic physical constants. Similarly, the speed of sound doesn't depend of the frequency of the sound wave.
852104
The frequency in the number of times the wave vibrates in one second. \nIn your question, you probably have light.  The speed of light is 300,000km/s.  If you multiply the frequency and the wavelength, you get the speed.  That is v=lf\nThat 595nm is actually 595x10e-9m or 0,000000595m\nThe speed of light is 3x10e8m/s\nSo the frequency is\nf=v/l\nf=300000000/0.000000595\nf=504201680672268.91\nf=5.1e14 hertz
827091
Hi. I think it deals more with the interaction of radiation with particles (or a particle) than with speed. At any non-relativistic speed (less than .1 'c' say) the wavelength would not be infinite or unbounded. Just my opinion.
49096
You can't go the speed of light, but even if you were going 99.9999999% the speed of light, yes, you could shine the beam forward, backwards, or sideways, and it would look normal in every direction.  That's the central idea behind relativty.\n\nAnd NO, the light would NOT be going twice the speed of light.  Anyone who says that is BSing you.
168923
>>>>why can nothing excede the speed of light?\n\nLots of things can and do exceed the speed of light.\n \nNo information or mass can exceed the speed of light. Why? Because the speed of light is our one reference point. If anything exceeded the speed of light it would arrive at its destination BEFORE it was sent.\n\nIt's exactly like recieving a letter the day before it is written. It's impossible and  it makes no real sesne to ask why it can't happen. Cause has to preceed effect.\n\n>>>>if radio waves are slower than light\n\nRadio waves are just electromagnetic radiation. They travel at lightspeed just like all other EMR.\n\n>>>>>then wouldnt gama and X rays be faster?\n\nNo, they also travel at C. They just have higher freqencies.\n\n>>> or do all waves travel at the same speed and the light >>> part is just a term\n\nWaves have all sorts of speeds. \nOcean waves travel at variable speeds, often les than 10  kms.hr. \nSound waves travel at a bit over 1000km/hr. \nLight waves travel at the speed of light.\n\n_______________\nInfinity said:"By the way, the quote "Lots of things can and \n>>>>>>do exceed the speed of light" is entirely false.\n\nI really, really wish people would do some basic research before attempting to adress points they clearly don't understand.\n\nThe expansion of the universe itself is faster than the speed of light (see the link below).\n\nAnd as wd5gnr and Hound both said it is perfectly possible for non-information bearing events to propagate faster than lightspeed. We recently had an in depth discussion on the experiments which have managed to produce pahse vlocities hundreds of times faster than light.\n\nAnd of course there are many many other events that travel at speeds well in excess of C.\n\nReally Infinity, you should at least take the time to do some research before correcting others. It saves you embarassment of this kind. More importantly it prevents you misleading others and spreading your ignorance.
144969
It's something along the lines that mass increases with speed. The closer you get to the speed of light the more mass you achieve, which requires more energy to move you. This increases exponentially, always getting closer to the speed of light, until you are essentially immovable, you can't get any heavier so can't move any faster. I heard this explained in a college class once and probably totally got it wrong, but it's in that vein.
276783
No, the speed of light remains constant, the frequency changes.  This is known as the Doppler Effect.  As something emitting light moves away from you (very fast), the wavelengths become longer (more red).  Likewise something moving towards you, the wavelengths become shorter (more blue).\n\nTo make a comparison to sound.  Think of standing alongside a train track and listening to a train horn.  The pitch (frequency) drops as the train passes by.  The speed of sound really isn't changing much at all, since the density of the air surrounding you remains the same.  But while the train is moving towards you, the sound waves become compressed, resulting in a higher frequency.  When the train passes, the sound waves are expanded, resulting in a lower frequency.
238750
Energy is directly proportional to frequency, as governed by the equation E=hv, where E is energy, h is planck's constant, and v is freuqency, in hertz.  \n\nSince wavelength is inversely proportional to frequency, and energy is directly proportional to wavelength, energy is inversely proportional to wavelength.  \n\nc=(wavelength)(frequency), where c is the speed of light\nE=(h)(v)=(h)(c/wavelength)
347791
Your example is actually a good one for how we know no one can travel faster than the speed of light.  The people on the boat would measure the same speed for the beam of light as those standing on the shore.\n\nEinstein's theory of special relativity states that, regardless of your motion, light's speed remains constant.  Space and time warp in order to make light's speed constant from all perspectives.  As matter gets closer and closer to the speed of light, space stretches and time contracts, requiring infinite energy to reach the speed of light.  Only things with no mass (i. e. energy only) can travel at the speed of light, and nothing we know of can go faster.\n\nHowever, Einstein's theories do suggest that we could bend space and time to allow us to get around the speed of light.  We can't travel a trillion miles per second, but, with enough energy, we could shift some spot a trillion miles away to right next to us.
706572
The answers already given are generally correct for light travelling in a vacuum. However, the speed of light slows down when it travels through any material substance (the exact amount depends on the material).
416072
It depends on the wavelength of the light and its energy.
1107829
There is no question that light obeys its speed limit. And I agree with the many others who said that light will travel to infinity unless it is absorbed by matter. But what if there were a distance limit? Now it may not make sense to say that a photon of light has a distance limit, but it could possibly be correct that photons of light have a lifetime, albeit very very long. \n\nScience theorizes that the 3-degree Kelvin background radiation we see everywhere is what is left from the initial Big Bang. Based on this temperature, cosmologists tell us the universe is somewhere between 11.2 billion to 20 billion years old. BUT, what if photons decay like radioactive particles and have a half-life? What if their half-life were 1 billion years? There would be too much 3-degree background radiation around to be explained by a universe between 11.2 billion and 20 billion years old. So the universe would have to be much younger and as a consequence, much smaller. \n\nYour question provoked a cool idea which I'm sure has been provoked' before.
177169
If it has rest mass, it can't travel faster than light, because as it gets closer to lightspeed, more of the energy you're using to increase its speed is converted into an increase in mass, which of course makes it harder to increase its speed.  Lorentz and Fitzgerald worked out the equations a century ago, and they've been confirmed in particle accelerators.  See the link.
306574
The important principle in this theory is:\n\nThe speed of light is not affected by the speed of the source emitting this light.\n \nThat is: “Once light is emitted from a source it moves in vacuum with a constant speed.\n\nSpeed of a matter and the speed of light are measured by measuring length and time.   But light is energy; whereas the source is a matter.\n\nIf both observers; one at rest and another moving; says that light’s speed is same for both, there are only two possibilities; 1. Both must be at rest or 2. Time and length must be different for the two observers. \n\nBut one observer sees that the other is moving with a speed relative to him. Therefore, time and length must be different for the two observers.\nThe other consequence is that mass is also affected by its speed. \n\nThe one at rest will observe that time and the length are shortened for a moving object such that the speed of light is the same for both frames of reference. \n\nSince the moving observer observes that the other one is moving and he is at rest he will say in the other man’s reference frame time and length are shortened such that the speed of light is the same for both frames of reference. \n\nThis is the theory of relativity.
971516
When you light a block of glass, part of the light will be absorbed by the glass.\nIn other words, part of the photons will be absorbed by the glass.\nOther photons will be reflected back by the block of glass, and others will pass through it.\nThe lose of energy of your light ray will be seen as a reduction in the number of photons in the ray, in other words, in a reduction in the ray's INTENSITY. Not as a change in the light's frequency.\n\nHowever, the glass will absorb certain light frequencies better than other. (Each matter has its own "absorption graph").\nBecause of that, if your light ray is not a monochromatic one, it is possible that the ratio between the different light frequencies in the ray will change.
943929
The frequency of light and its wavelength have an inverse relationship.  As the frequency of light increases, the wavelength decreases.\nThe frequency is the number of 'cycles' per unit time, and the wavelength is how far the wave propagates in that same time.  At a constant speed, the shorter the higher the frequency (very short time durations between cycles), the smaller the wavelength.\n\nThe energy contained within a single photon of light is given by Planck's equation,\nE = hv\nwhere E is the energy, h is Planck's constant, and v is the frequency of light.\nThe equation can be re-written as,\nE = h * c / lambda\nWhere c is the speed of light in a vacuum, and lambda is the wavelength of light.\n\nYou can see that as the frequency of the light increases (or when the wavelength decreases), the energy contained within a photon of light increases.  The higher the frequency of light, the more energy the light carries.  For example, high frequency X-rays carry much more energy than low frequency radio waves.\n\nh = 6.626 E-34 J s
71955
Here are two explanations (neither particularly satisfying I will tell  you in advance.)\n\nThe first is that the speed of light (in a vaccuum) is a property of the universe that is measured the same by everyone, regardless of their motion relative to anyone else. This is a true statement born out by experiment, but it implies some very weird stuff.  One is that distance and time are not measured the same by people in relative motion.  Another is that you can never get closer to a beam of light going away from you (i.e. go faster than the speed of light).  If you could, you would measure the speed of light differently than someone else, and you would be special.  The basic idea behind relativity is that, with regard to the laws of physics, no one is special.  \n\nThe second unsatisfying answer is E=mc^2.  In order to go faster, you have to accelerate.  Acceleration takes energy, and an accelerating body has more mass than a body in a constant state of motion (increase E in that equation m has go up, because c is the constant speed of light).  It just so happens that the mass doesn't go up in proportion to the rate of acceleration, but in relationship to how close you are to the speed of light.  Everytime you halve the distance between your speed and the speed of light, your mass doubles, and the amount of effort needed to get that next bit of acceleration doubles.  Getting to the speed of light would require infinite energy.