Re: [Phys-l] Physics Grammar

[John Denker <jsd@av8n.com>]

On 01/23/2008 09:19 AM, Josh GATES wrote:
> So, instead of "speed of light," we should say "speed of electromagnetic
> radiation?"  This one doesn't have my vote.

Not my vote either.

 -- Counterexample:  Ultraviolet light ... sounds grammatical to me.

 -- Counterexample:  The definition of "visible" is not precisely
  definable.  The eye can see far into the so-called infrared if
  the scene is bright enough.

Besides, who cares?  Ideas are primary; terminology (including
definitions) are secondary.  Terminology is important only insofar
as it helps us formulate and communicate ideas.  Wrangling over
the precise definition of "light" is at best unnecessary, and
in all likelihood counterproductive.

Yeah, I know students crave precise definitions.  But they
should be trained not to.