Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Question about the low end of the electromagnetic spectrum

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    216

    Question about the low end of the electromagnetic spectrum

    Is there anything of longer wavelength than radiowaves?

    It looks like radiowaves start at 10^5 Hz.
    Is there any form of EM rad at 10^0 - 10^4 Hz?

    Thanks.

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by TOEfetish View Post
    Is there anything of longer wavelength than radiowaves?
    If you look here, you can see that there are things with longer wavelengths than radio waves, such as ELF and VLF.
    As above, so below

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    3,057
    If you look here, you can see that there are things with longer wavelengths than radio waves, such as ELF and VLF.
    ULF, ELF and VLF are called radio waves too, just like LF, HF, UHF, SHF and so on. They are just ITU wavelength bands. Anything down to 0 would be called a radio wave as far as I know. You see some really long wavelength radio sources associates with plasmas IIRC.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    location
    Posts
    10,167
    Perhaps we should ask if there are frequencies that have wavelengths larger than the universe.
    Et tu BAUT? Quantum mutatus ab illo.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    216
    If elf and vlf electromagnetic radiation, emitted from a very distant location, say 10billion lightyears away, arrives here on Earth,
    it would have redshifted due to universe expansion,
    What would this emr look like when it finally gets here?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,558
    Like EM with a very large wavelength.

    Redshifting would cause minimal elongation of the waves between the source and us. If this wasn't so, distant galaxies should be red, which of course they're not.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4,530
    Quote Originally Posted by SkepticJ View Post
    Like EM with a very large wavelength.

    Redshifting would cause minimal elongation of the waves between the source and us. If this wasn't so, distant galaxies should be red, which of course they're not.
    Red shifting doesn't necessarily make things red--but wouldn't they be elongated by the amount of the Hubble constant?

    But what do you mean by "EM with a very large wavelength" and "minimal elongation of the waves", those phrases seem to contradict each other?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    216
    Quote Originally Posted by grapes View Post
    Red shifting doesn't necessarily make things red--but wouldn't they be elongated by the amount of the Hubble constant?

    But what do you mean by "EM with a very large wavelength" and "minimal elongation of the waves", those phrases seem to contradict each other?
    I think he or she is saying that there wouldnt be that much of an observable redshift from the hubble constant. I disagree.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4,530
    Quote Originally Posted by TOEfetish View Post
    I think he or she is saying that there wouldnt be that much of an observable redshift from the hubble constant. I disagree.
    If you already have an answer, why post the question? What is your answer?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,558
    Quote Originally Posted by grapes View Post
    Red shifting doesn't necessarily make things red--but wouldn't they be elongated by the amount of the Hubble constant?

    But what do you mean by "EM with a very large wavelength" and "minimal elongation of the waves", those phrases seem to contradict each other?
    Right, which is a negligible effect on what we call visible light. It's not obviously red--the spectrum is shifted so finely toward the red that instrumentation is needed to see it.

    The same should hold true for radio that has large wavelengths.

    Minimal elongation from the baseline: the wavelength that was emitted at the radio source.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    3,057
    Right, which is a negligible effect on what we call visible light. It's not obviously red--the spectrum is shifted so finely toward the red that instrumentation is needed to see it.
    Tell that to the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    216
    Quote Originally Posted by grapes View Post
    If you already have an answer, why post the question? What is your answer?
    I dont already have an answer. I was trying to help you understand what SkepticJ was saying.
    I still do not know what the longest known radio waves would look like when they get stretched out.

    I was saying that i disagree that the observed redshift would be negligible - in fact i was agreeing with you...it would redshift in the amount of the Hubble constant.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    a long way away
    Posts
    7,651
    Quote Originally Posted by TOEfetish View Post
    I still do not know what the longest known radio waves would look like when they get stretched out.
    Longer radio waves.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Falls Church, VA (near Washington, DC)
    Posts
    4,025
    Quote Originally Posted by SkepticJ View Post
    Right, which is a negligible effect on what we call visible light. It's not obviously red--the spectrum is shifted so finely toward the red that instrumentation is needed to see it.The same should hold true for radio that has large wavelengths.

    Minimal elongation from the baseline: the wavelength that was emitted at the radio source.
    My bold. That depends on how much redshift and the type of spectrum. If we had a source with a blackbody spectrum like that of Sirius, and put it at a distance where z =3, the wavelengths will be stretched by a factor of 4 across the board, and the source will look more like an M star, which is noticeably redder that the bluish white tint of Sirius. In practice, even whole galaxies that far away are so faint that we probably would not see anything but shades of gray with our own eyes, even with the largest telescopes.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    137
    If you put Sirius at z=3, you won't see anything at visible wavelengths; the blackbody peak is in the blue-green, so stretching that by a factor of four is going to put everything in the IR. At z=1, it will look something like an M star. Still, I agree with your point that redshift can be very noticeable and obvious.

  16. #16
    At z=1 Sirius would be about 2.5 giga parsecs away or about a billion times farther away than it is, making its intensity about 1/31600th of what we see, which is I'm not completely mistaken would make it a magnitude twelve thousand star (approximately).

    This is not something we're going to actually observe for individual stars.
    __________________________________________________
    Reductionist and proud of it.

    Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn. Benjamin Franklin
    Chase after the truth like all hell and you'll free yourself, even though you never touch its coat tails. Clarence Darrow
    A person who won't read has no advantage over one who can't read. Mark Twain

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    13,441
    Quote Originally Posted by TOEfetish View Post
    If elf and vlf electromagnetic radiation, emitted from a very distant location, say 10billion lightyears away, arrives here on Earth,
    it would have redshifted due to universe expansion,
    No such radiation can arrive here on Earth, period.

    IIRC, ELF is used for (one-way) communication with submarines, and there is a need for only one transmitter. Why? Because the ionosphere is a perfect mirror for this EMR (electromagnetic radiation), and the ground/sea a near-perfect one too. That also means no ELF from beyond the ionosphere can reach us, "here on Earth".

    And why is the ionosphere opaque to ELF? Because it's a plasma, with an electron density sufficiently high that EMR with ELF frequencies is fully absorbed. Check out the term "plasma frequency" for more details, e.g. from here.

    What about above the ionosphere? Well, the stuff within the Earth's magnetosphere is also a plasma, as is the interplanetary medium, the interstellar medium, the intergalactic medium, the ... Of course, each has a different plasma frequency (because their electron densities are different) - so the frequency of EMR at which they are opaque will also differ - but I think, if you plug in the numbers, you'll see that ELF cannot go anywhere, and that any EMR which is redshifted to the ELF will also be stopped dead in its tracks.

    Would you like to do some sums, TOEfetish, and work out with the minimum EMR frequency is, for us to be able to observe a distant source emitting it, say from an observatory in Tasmania, or on the Moon? Or one on a small moon of Pluto? Or on some Oort cloud object, well beyond the heliosheath?

    What would this emr look like when it finally gets here?
    What colour hair would I have if my maternal grandfather had died before he met my maternal grandmother?

    Sometimes a question just does not make sense.

  18. #18
    It's even worse than Nereid suggests - the ionized components of the galactic interstellar medium absorb radiation with frequencies less than ~3 Mhz, with this absorption reaching a factor >1000 by 100 kHz. This paper has a data plot including measurements from the Radio Astronomy Explorer B in lunar orbit as well as distant probes in solar orbit (both to get beyond interference from the Earth's auroral zones). The observer would have to be outside the Galaxy to pick up much of this radiation (and it would have been attenuated greatly on the way out of most galaxies as well).

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    137
    Quote Originally Posted by HenrikOlsen View Post
    At z=1 Sirius would be about 2.5 giga parsecs away or about a billion times farther away than it is, making its intensity about 1/31600th of what we see, which is I'm not completely mistaken would make it a magnitude twelve thousand star (approximately).

    This is not something we're going to actually observe for individual stars.
    That's true that we don't observe individual stars like this, but 1/30000th brightness is only a difference of ~12-13 magnitudes at worst (every five magnitudes is a factor of 100 in apparent brightness). If you put Sirius a billion times further away than it is, the apparent brightness goes down by a factor of 10^18 (distance squared), which is still about 40 magnitudes difference, not 12,000. However, that is still enough to make it completely invisible (Hubble's LM is ~30).

  20. #20
    I blame writing this at work, I did a square root where I should have squared, then divided instead of log'ed.

    Still invisible though, so I didn't screw that one up.
    __________________________________________________
    Reductionist and proud of it.

    Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn. Benjamin Franklin
    Chase after the truth like all hell and you'll free yourself, even though you never touch its coat tails. Clarence Darrow
    A person who won't read has no advantage over one who can't read. Mark Twain

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Falls Church, VA (near Washington, DC)
    Posts
    4,025
    I never intended to imply the possibility of observing a single star like Sirius at such vast distances. This was a thought exercise with something as luminous as a large galaxy, but having a spectrum like that of a 10,000K blackbody. At z = 3 it would look like a 2,500K blackbody, which is some 95% infrared but still glows brightly like a tungsten filament during a brownout.

Similar Threads

  1. Electromagnetic spectrum
    By Boratssister in forum Science and Technology
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 2011-Feb-12, 07:41 AM
  2. The electromagnetic spectrum
    By Faulkner in forum Space/Astronomy Questions and Answers
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 2008-Jan-02, 12:32 AM
  3. Podcast: Across the Electromagnetic Spectrum
    By Fraser in forum Universe Today
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 2007-Jan-08, 05:08 PM
  4. **The Electromagnetic Spectrum
    By noha in forum Science and Technology
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 2006-Mar-08, 01:53 PM
  5. **The Electromagnetic Spectrum
    By noha in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 2006-Feb-16, 02:25 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •