Difference between revisions of "Talk:273: Electromagnetic Spectrum"
RalphSiegler (talk | contribs) (cosmic rays not part of EM spectrum) |
RalphSiegler (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| − | Now why did Randall Munroe go with the old 1960s notion of putting gamma/cosmic rays at the high end of the spectrum. Back then certain events in detectors were thought to be caused by photons of higher frequency than gamma rays, but now those are known to instead be made by very energetic charged nuclei not electromagnetism. --[[User:RalphSiegler|RalphSiegler]] ([[User talk:RalphSiegler|talk]]) 15:07, 7 July 2013 (UTC) | + | Now why did Randall Munroe go with the old 1960s notion of putting gamma/cosmic rays at the high end of the spectrum. Back then certain events in detectors were thought to be caused by photons of higher frequency than gamma rays, but now those are known to instead be made by very energetic charged nuclei not electromagnetism. Thus "cosmic rays" not part of EM spectrum at all. --[[User:RalphSiegler|RalphSiegler]] ([[User talk:RalphSiegler|talk]]) 15:07, 7 July 2013 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:07, 7 July 2013
"Light particles were formerly carried by the aether, which was decommissioned in 1897 due to budget cuts." Ohh, this is so INCOMPLETE, just read the comic, I still laughing and I can't stop. --Dgbrt (talk) 18:20, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Now why did Randall Munroe go with the old 1960s notion of putting gamma/cosmic rays at the high end of the spectrum. Back then certain events in detectors were thought to be caused by photons of higher frequency than gamma rays, but now those are known to instead be made by very energetic charged nuclei not electromagnetism. Thus "cosmic rays" not part of EM spectrum at all. --RalphSiegler (talk) 15:07, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
