Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] Physics Grammar



Hi.

-- I like using "light" as a shorthand for human visible EMR. I interchangably use "gamma radiation" and "gamma ray" but I never say "gamma light." Does anybody say that? What about "microwave light?" Hmmm.
--

What risks do I run when I say things like, infra-red light, UV light, X-ray light? I haven't said "gamma light" yet, but it isn't out of the question. I've been using these terms for about 5 years.
I work with kids in grades 9-12. At the start of my first crack (grade 9), many think sound & light are the same type of wave (either both are mechanical, or both are EM waves).
I've been using IR-Light, UV Light etc... and stating that they are the same thing, just at frequencies outside of our visible range.

Am I causing any damage here?

I understand that is similar to the question that began this thread. I believe it might be a bit different. I am not asking if this should become standard notation or if we should be saying UV EM light radiation waves. Am I abusing folks in some way? I don't want somebody claiming I am the source of their abuse (dis-abuse?).
Thanks.


Paul Lulai (reading more than I write, trying to stay within the bounds of this list, and thankful for your help)
Physics Teacher
St. Anthony Village Senior High
Saint Anthony Village, MN
55418
(w) 612-706-1144
(fax) 612-706-1020
plulai@stanthony.k12.mn.us

I like using "light" as a shorthand for human visible EMR. I interchangably use "gamma radiation" and "gamma ray" but I never say "gamma light." Does anybody say that? What about "microwave light?" Hmmm.

Oh, let's don't get into "sound" and "sound waves." Anyway, the proper name is "phonons." :)

BN
Union University

Bernard Cleyet <bernardcleyet@redshift.com> 1/23/2008 4:17 pm >>>
Sound waves are not sound --- sound is the perception of sound waves.
Similarly, light is the perception of EM radiation -- specifically by
eyes. I understand some "primitive" animals had / have light sensitive
spots; these are probably considered precursors of eyes and may be
considered as eyes for the purpose of the definition. IR on the skin
does not count.

bc has never heard the expression IR light, right? It's IR radiation,
so there! BTW, by my definition one perhaps might include, as another
points out, some UV wavelengths, as I can see bright UV, because my, and
I suppose most others', cornea and or the aqueous, and / or the lens
fluoresces *. But no way is the eye acting as a camera; it's just a
bluish whitish sheen, and I don't recommend anyone trying this for long
if one doesn't want the next day to think there's sand in their eyes.

* So one isn't seeing UV! But then that means discussing what seeing
is. Reminds me of what is, is.
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l