Re: [Phys-l] Physics Grammar

["Jeffrey Schnick" <JSchnick@Anselm.Edu>]

I consider a photon to be light no matter what its energy is.  Light
that is visible in one inertial reference frame won't be visible in an
inertial reference frame moving, relative to the first inertial
reference frame, fast enough along the path of the light, but observing
the light from another reference frame doesn't change the light from
being light into not being light.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu [mailto:phys-l-
> bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu] On Behalf Of Larry Smith
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 11:03 AM
> To: Forum for Physics Educators
> Subject: [Phys-l] Physics Grammar
>
> The Physics Teacher, current issue (Feb 2008), page 74, has a couple
of
> items relating to "physics grammar" that I would like the list's
response
> to.
>
> ------begin quote------
>
> 1. Light is defined as that portion of the Electromagnetic Spectrum to
> which the human eye is sensitive.  So light is "visible
Electromagnetic
> Radiation (EMR)."  Thus "visible light" is redundant because it would
> translate to "visible visible EMR."  The terms "infrared light" and
> "ultraviolet light" are also incorrect because "light" is the visible
part
> of the EMR and infrared and ultraviolet radiation are not visible.
>
> ------end quote---------