0

Sorry if this a weird question here but is the electromagnetic spectrum a 'thing' (energy) or it is just a representation of the electromagnetic continuum?

For example on telecommunications, if you are referring to the electromagnetic radiation that is propagated by an antenna as a resource wouldn't it be more precise to call it like that: "electromagnetic radiation", instead of referring to the resource as "the electromagnetic spectrum"?

Further questions to clarify:

Would you consider the electromagnetic radiation propagating over a country the electromagnetic spectrum available that is located there?

Is it scientifically accurate to say that a more extended country has more electromagnetic spectrum available than a smaller country?

Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that a country has more available electromagnetic field over it instead of electromagnetic spectrum over it?

I want to know the opinion of the physicists on this matter.

Ventolinmono
  • 109

4 Answers4

1

The entire electromagnetic spectrum is a natural phenomenon which encompasses a very broad range of things we can physically measure and study, comprising radio waves, infrared radiation, visible light, ultraviolet light, X-rays and gamma rays. It exists independently of human observation and is not a representation of something or anything else. It is a resource which can be put to use.

To make use of that resource, government organizations allocate specific segments of that spectrum for use by their citizens for specific purposes to further the interests of those citizens and those governments. Those organizations cooperate internationally to arrive at consistent regulations regarding those allocation processes and those specific purposes around the world. Examples are spectrum allocations for television, FM and AM radio, two-way communications, data transmission, radiotelescopy, and so forth. As such:

"The electromagnetic radiation propagating over a country is the electromagnetic spectrum available that is located there" is a meaningless statement.

It is not scientifically accurate to say that a more extended country has more electromagnetic spectrum available than does a smaller country.

"A country has more available electromagnetic field over it instead of electromagnetic spectrum over it" is likewise a meaningless statement.

niels nielsen
  • 99,024
0

main source of confusion: "the electromagnetic spectrum" = the set of all possible frequencies of "electromagnetic radiation"

For example on telecommunications, if you are referring to the electromagnetic radiation that is propagated by an antenna as a resource wouldn't it be more precise to call it like that: "electromagnetic radiation", instead of referring to the resource as "the electromagnetic spectrum"?

yes, a radio tower might produce "a spectrum of radiation" in the sense that it can generate a continuum of different frequencies (so a set of "electromagnetic radiation"), but it cannot of course make any frequency and therefore does not produce "the electromagnetic spectrum."

Would you consider the electromagnetic radiation propagating over a country the electromagnetic spectrum available that is located there?

Not really sure what you mean here.

Is it scientifically accurate to say that a more extended country has more electromagnetic spectrum available than a smaller country?

A country? Electromagnetic Radiation can be created by many different types of sources, the sun, radiotowers, electronics. I think you are misunderstanding something here.

Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that a country has more available electromagnetic field over it instead of electromagnetic spectrum over it?

"more available electromagnetic field" is not enough because you also need to specify the amount of each frequency that you have.

Steven Sagona
  • 2,348
0

The electromagnetic spectrum is the organization and classification of the physical phenomena that is electromagnetic radiation. It is the finite range of electromagnetic frequencies that can exist in any one physical space. It is not a "physical thing" the same way electromagnetic radiation is. But it is still a resource in the same way the empty space in a room is a resource, even though the empty space is not a physical "thing", to be allocated and used.

Would you consider the electromagnetic radiation propagating over a country the electromagnetic spectrum available that is located there?

No, see above.

Is it scientifically accurate to say that a more extended country has more electromagnetic spectrum available than a smaller country?

No no no. A larger country has more physical area than a smaller country but not more electromagnetic spectrum. Everywhere has the same amount of electromagnetic spectrum (same range of electromagnetic frequencies which can exist) available to it.

DKNguyen
  • 9,389
-1

It's both.

Objectively speaking the electromagnetic spectrum is a thing in itself, or 'energy' as you say, but we represent it to ourself as light and colour. In this sense it is a qualia of experience. It's why Schopenhauer called the world a representation. This goes back to Kant, and perhaps earlier to Pythagoras.

Mozibur Ullah
  • 14,713