Conservation of quantized energy

In summary: The following text is an excerpt from a physics book:Conservation of energy requires that the energy carried off by the radiated electromagnetic waves must equal the energy lost by the atomic oscillators in Planck’s model. Suppose, for example, that an oscillator with an energy of 3hf emits an electromagnetic wave. According to Equation 29.1*, the next smallest allowed value for the energy of the oscillator is 2hf. In such a case, the energy carried off by the electromagnetic wave would have the value of hf, equaling the amount of energy lost by the oscillator.I find this paragraph a bit hard to grasp, so I have some questions about it
  • #1
Tranceform
22
0
The following text is an excerpt from a physics book:

Conservation of energy requires that the energy carried off by the radiated electromagnetic waves must equal the energy lost by the atomic oscillators in Planck’s model. Suppose, for example, that an oscillator with an energy of 3hf emits an electromagnetic wave. According to Equation 29.1*, the next smallest allowed value for the energy of the oscillator is 2hf. In such a case, the energy carried off by the electromagnetic wave would have the value of hf, equaling the amount of energy lost by the oscillator.

* E = nhf, n = 0,1,2,3,...

I find this paragraph a bit hard to grasp, so I have some questions about it and I would appreciate if they are clarified.

1) What is meant by "the energy carried off by the radiated electromagnetic waves"? As I interpret this it means the energy that are within (travelling) electromagnetic waves. Right? (I think the word "off" confuses me, why not just say "carried BY"?)

2) What does it mean that the energy is "lost"? As energy can't be destroyed but only transformed, what is it transformed into?

3) As I understood a a perfect blackbody, it is a body which absorbs AND re-emits all electromagnetic waves that are incident on it. But if the body re-emits everything that is incident on it, how can the object both gain (absorb) this energy and at the same time re-emit it? That would mean it duplicated the energy? Or does it only absorb half the incident energy and re-emits the other half?

4) Are "the energy carried off by the radiated electromagnetic waves" and "the energy lost by the atomic oscillators" always identical? Or only so for a perfect blackbody?

5) Is there some other energy form involved in this situation that is not mentioned here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
1. Correct. It is the energy of the EM wave.

2. Lost just means that the oscillator had 3hf energy, and now it has 2hf. An amount of energy equal to hf is no longer possessed by the oscillator. It has been "lost" by the oscillator to the EM wave.

3. A perfect blackbody absorbs all EM radiation incident on it. It emits EM radiation based on its temperature, not based on the radiation absorbed. In other words, you could shine 100 watts of microwave radiation on it, heating it to 1,000 k and it would be emitting primarily in the infrared range. Heat it to 5,000 k and it would emit primarily in the visible range.

4. They are always identical since energy is conserved.

5. Nope.
 
  • #3
Drakkith said:
2. Lost just means that the oscillator had 3hf energy, and now it has 2hf. An amount of energy equal to hf is no longer possessed by the oscillator. It has been "lost" by the oscillator to the EM wave.
But what does it mean it has been "lost"? Where did it go?

Drakkith said:
3. A perfect blackbody absorbs all EM radiation incident on it. It emits EM radiation based on its temperature, not based on the radiation absorbed. In other words, you could shine 100 watts of microwave radiation on it, heating it to 1,000 k and it would be emitting primarily in the infrared range. Heat it to 5,000 k and it would emit primarily in the visible range.
Ok, I understand the emitted radiation depends on temperature. But then I have some follow-up questions:

6) Under which circumstances does a perfect blackbody re-emit all incident radiation?

7) Is the absorbed energy of a perfect blackbody always equal to the energy the same body re-emits?

8) If we shine 100 wattseconds on a perfect blackbody, will it a) also absorb 100 wattseconds? b) AND re-emit 100 wattseconds? Or how would the energy be distributed?

Thanks in advance.
 
  • #4
6) In thermal equilibrium a blackbody will emit just as much ENERGY as it absorbs. The absorbed radiation is absorbed, it can't in a sense be "re-emitted" in the sense that you seem to be using this word. You seem to be using the word re-emitted like reflected.

7) see 6 above, in thermal equilibrium yes, otherwise no.

8) If we had a blackbody at 0K in a complete vacuum (no CMB) and shined a 100w flashlight on it for 1 second, it would absorb 100 watts. It would increase in temperature a little, and then eventually emit 100 joules of radiation. How long it takes to do so depends on its surface area.
 
  • #5
Matterwave said:
6) In thermal equilibrium a blackbody will emit just as much ENERGY as it absorbs. The absorbed radiation is absorbed, it can't in a sense be "re-emitted" in the sense that you seem to be using this word. You seem to be using the word re-emitted like reflected.
It's true I think of the "re-emitting" as reflection, are you saying this view is incorrect? How can then one think of it, how is it different from reflection?

Matterwave said:
8) If we had a blackbody at 0K in a complete vacuum (no CMB) and shined a 100w flashlight on it for 1 second, it would absorb 100 watts. It would increase in temperature a little, and then eventually emit 100 joules of radiation. How long it takes to do so depends on its surface area.

So if I understand it correctly (please correct me if I'm wrong) when we have electromagnetic radiation shining on a perfect blackbody, the body absorbs (all of) the energy of the radiation, which makes the body heat up to some extent. Then the body emits the same amount of energy again. The energy being radiated is equal to the energy being absorbed which is again equal to the energy being emitted. Is that correct?
 
  • #6
Tranceform said:
But what does it mean it has been "lost"? Where did it go?

It went to the emitted EM wave. That's it. It wasn't destroyed, it was moved.

6) Under which circumstances does a perfect blackbody re-emit all incident radiation?

As Matterwave said, the radiation is absorbed, not reflected.

7) Is the absorbed energy of a perfect blackbody always equal to the energy the same body re-emits?

In Matterwave's example, the blackbody absorbed 100 joules of energy in 1 second (100 watts). It then re-emits 100 joules of energy over a much longer period of time since the 100 joules only heated it up a little bit. So yes, it emits the same amount of energy that it absorbs.

8) If we shine 100 wattseconds on a perfect blackbody, will it a) also absorb 100 wattseconds? b) AND re-emit 100 wattseconds? Or how would the energy be distributed?

100 watts per second is 100 joules of energy, so let's use that. If you shine 100 joules of energy onto the blackbody it will re-emit that same amount of energy as radiation over time. The distribution of frequencies depends on how hot the blackbody is.

Tranceform said:
It's true I think of the "re-emitting" as reflection, are you saying this view is incorrect? How can then one think of it, how is it different from reflection?

Think back to my earlier example with the microwaves. The blackbody absorbs all of this radiation. If the blackbody is heated up to room temperature, most of the radiation is emitted as infrared radiation, not microwaves. The hotter it is, the higher the average frequency of the emitted radiation.

So if I understand it correctly (please correct me if I'm wrong) when we have electromagnetic radiation shining on a perfect blackbody, the body absorbs (all of) the energy of the radiation, which makes the body heat up to some extent. Then the body emits the same amount of energy again. The energy being radiated is equal to the energy being absorbed which is again equal to the energy being emitted. Is that correct?

That is correct.
 

1. What is the conservation of quantized energy?

The conservation of quantized energy is a fundamental law of physics that states that the total amount of energy in a closed system remains constant over time. This means that energy cannot be created or destroyed, but can only be converted from one form to another. In other words, the total energy of a system always stays the same, regardless of any changes that may occur within the system.

2. How is quantized energy different from other forms of energy?

Quantized energy is different from other forms of energy because it is discrete and can only exist in specific amounts, or "quanta". This is in contrast to continuous energy, which can take on any value. Quantized energy is often associated with subatomic particles and is a fundamental concept in quantum mechanics.

3. What does the conservation of quantized energy mean for the behavior of particles?

The conservation of quantized energy means that particles can only gain or lose energy in discrete amounts, or quanta. This leads to specific rules and behaviors that determine how particles interact with each other and their environment. For example, in an atom, electrons can only occupy specific energy levels, and when they transition between these levels, they emit or absorb energy in the form of photons.

4. How does the conservation of quantized energy impact our everyday lives?

The conservation of quantized energy has implications for many aspects of our everyday lives. For example, it explains why certain materials have distinct colors, why electrons flow in a circuit, and how solar panels convert light into electricity. It also plays a crucial role in modern technologies such as computers, lasers, and medical imaging devices.

5. Are there any exceptions to the conservation of quantized energy?

There are no known exceptions to the conservation of quantized energy. This law has been extensively tested and confirmed through various experiments and observations. However, in extreme situations, such as near black holes or in the early universe, the concept of quantized energy may need to be modified to account for other factors, such as gravity and the expansion of the universe.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
899
Replies
1
Views
355
Replies
54
Views
5K
  • Quantum Physics
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
27
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
956
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Classical Physics
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
3
Views
980
Back
Top