File talk:Light dispersion conceptual waves.gif

Minor tweak[edit]

This is a great image. One adjustment that might help it be clearer (as a stand-alone) would be to have the white light entering the prism fade from white beam at far left to composite of ROYGBIV waves of same width as they enter the prism. --Belg4mit (talk) 17:53, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that would be counterproductive. The whole point of the image is to show how the separate colours propagate at different speeds and with different directions inside the prism. This separate propagation begins at the entrance to the prism. The waves with distinct directions should not be mis-represented as white. If one wanted the image to be more consistent, it would be better to eliminate the white beam entering the prism, and replace it with animated beams for each colour, each with its distinct wavelength but all propagating at the same speed. You lose the clear indication that the prism separates white light into colours that way, but you better illustrate how it works.--Srleffler (talk) 20:51, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it would. The point of my suggestion is to make clear that the different wavelengths are components of the white light. The prism has nothing to do with this. It only refracts the various wavelengths causing them to spread. So before the prism you have solid white shaft fading to overlayed waves of various frequencies, each propogating at the same velocity since they have not been refracted or dispersed. i.e; My suggestion is a middle ground between the current form and your idea of something "more consistent" which captures all the pertinent information. --Belg4mit (talk) 21:33, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see: you are proposing that the beam fade from a solid white beam to a set of coloured waves before it enters the prism. I thought you were proposing that the waves within the prism should remain white, and gradually acquire colour as they propagate through. The latter would be bad, but I agree that the former would be a very nice improvement to this image.--Srleffler (talk) 22:57, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. I guess the wording was a little vague. Cheers. --Belg4mit (talk) 21:00, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree this is a great image. However, I think another adjustment would also be appropriate, although I can imagine there will be some disagreement with what I'm about to suggest. I think the overall shape of the wave should be the same from one color to the other. In this illustration, the red is stretched in length only, when compared to shorter wavelengths. It should be stretched in amplitude as well, making it intuitive how diffraction works across different distances for different colors. Victor Engel (talk) 16:13, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great Image![edit]

It should be nominated for something! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.1.153.51 (talk) 16:56, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question about the speed of propagation[edit]

This is a minor detail of a fascinating animation. It appears to me that the red waves are propagating faster than the blue (both inside and out of the prism). Is this just my eyes playing a trick on me? If the red is going faster: Is it physically correct? I thought that all wavelengths of light propagate at the same speed (with in a consistent medium). I know that this is minor, but currently the animation makes the red light, look as if it goes faster than the other shorter wavelengths. (64.135.128.160 (talk) 16:07, 13 April 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Not a minor detail at all. The red waves propagate faster than the blue inside the prism, but not outside it. This is essential: the dispersion of light by the prism is caused by this difference in wave speed. If all wavelengths propagated at the same speed, the prism would not separate different colours of light.--Srleffler (talk) 23:41, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]