Talk:Frank–Tamm formula

Removed the following from the article I DON'T THINK THE REFRACTIVE INDEX BECOMES LESS THAN UNITY. THIS IS SAYING THAT THE SPEED OF LIGHT IN THE MEDIUM WAS GREATER THAN c. I THINK THIS SHOULD READ "the refractive index becomes less than c upon v". or alternatively that "the refractive index approaches unity as omega approaches infinity".

It should be placed in the discussion I think. It needs a footnote to explain it refers to the Phase Speed of light. To tell you the truth it is hard to grasp for me as well, but due to the diffences of group speed, phase speed and speed of light in vacuum the definitions of the refractive index are not always clear.

No longer orphan[edit]

The article on Cherenkove radiation uses this article as a reference, so I removed the orphan tag. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Viridiflavus (talk • contribs) 15:17, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Need graph to show shape of curves for different materials[edit]

Article needs a graph to show shape of curve (for different materials, since high freq shape depends on high freq refractive index). Perhaps like fig 7 of frank-tamm-formula (which is for heavy water ) or [1] (for air?) but extending to shorter wavelengths. As particle slows down does shape of spectrum change or just get less intense overall (fig 7 for heavy water wasn't clear) ? - Rod57 (talk) 12:28, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Spectrum shape clarification[edit]

From formula alone it follows that the radiation produces more photons at higher energy levels, in a continuous spectrum. Clearly, since it cannot emit infinite amounts of ultra hard gamma rays, the spectrum has to cut off somewhere. Does it look something like black body radiation spectrum?

Irrelevant Citation[edit]

I checked the citation for the formula, but drew a blank. I did notice that the formula was really given at page 638, at least on my copy of Jackson. I suspect the original citation may have an edition inconsistency. StudiousGoblin (talk) 01:00, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]