An object above absolute zero radiates energy


by eightsquare
Tags: absolute, energy, object, radiates
eightsquare
eightsquare is offline
#1
Aug25-13, 05:29 AM
P: 96
An object above absolute zero radiates energy. This implies that object on earth too radiate energy(infrared?) My question is, if the earth were not moving, we would be much slower, so would we radiate in some other wavelength of the spectrum? We are essentially travelling really fast because of the earth's movement.
Phys.Org News Partner Physics news on Phys.org
Physicists design quantum switches which can be activated by single photons
'Dressed' laser aimed at clouds may be key to inducing rain, lightning
Higher-order nonlinear optical processes observed using the SACLA X-ray free-electron laser
davenn
davenn is offline
#2
Aug25-13, 05:34 AM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
davenn's Avatar
P: 2,243
I couldnt see it affecting the amount IR radiation coming from our bodies


Dave
eightsquare
eightsquare is offline
#3
Aug25-13, 05:44 AM
P: 96
How so? We would be slower.

davenn
davenn is offline
#4
Aug25-13, 07:03 AM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
davenn's Avatar
P: 2,243

An object above absolute zero radiates energy


why would we be slower ?
if you walk a kilometre your body is still going to expend the same amount of
energy making your legs move regardless of whether the earth is stationary or moving

Dave
HallsofIvy
HallsofIvy is offline
#5
Aug25-13, 07:10 AM
Math
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
Thanks
PF Gold
P: 38,882
You seem to think that the speed of an object affects the amount of radiation it admits. Where did you get that idea?
phinds
phinds is offline
#6
Aug25-13, 07:14 AM
PF Gold
phinds's Avatar
P: 5,685
Quote Quote by eightsquare View Post
How so? We would be slower.
Slower relative to WHAT? Motion is relative. The radiation of the Earth has nothing to do with the speed that it is traveling with respect to other bodies. That speed, by the way, varies from zero to .999999% of c with all values in between. Why would picking one of those frames of reference have anything to do with how much the Earth radiates?
eightsquare
eightsquare is offline
#7
Aug25-13, 07:17 AM
P: 96
Well greater speed means more kinetic energy and higher kinetic energy means higher temperature and higher temperature means more radiation(that's the way I learnt it in school). Which part is wrong?
davenn
davenn is offline
#8
Aug25-13, 07:20 AM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
davenn's Avatar
P: 2,243
its wrong in the way you are relating things ( or not relating things)
as phinds said ... motion is relative

did you read my post post #4
does that not make sense to you ?

Dave
mfb
mfb is offline
#9
Aug25-13, 07:22 AM
Mentor
P: 10,809
If the earth would not orbit the sun, observers at other stars would see a slightly different spectrum and this spectrum would not depend on the position of earth in its orbit. The difference would be extremely small, however - we orbit sun with a velocity of ~30km/s, or 1/10000 the speed of light. Observers at other stars could (at most) see a shift of just 2/10000 between "earth moves away from us" and "earth moves towards us".

The total emitted light in the frame of earth is independent on the motion of earth relative to anything else.
The total emitted light as seen in other frames might depend on those other frames.

Quote Quote by eightsquare
and higher kinetic energy means higher temperature
No it does not. Temperature is related to unordered kinetic (and other) energy. The motion of the whole earth is not unordered.
eightsquare
eightsquare is offline
#10
Aug25-13, 07:27 AM
P: 96
Quote Quote by mfb View Post

No it does not. Temperature is related to unordered kinetic (and other) energy. The motion of the whole earth is not unordered.
Nice to get a civil explanation. So this basically means the more the atoms are banged about the more they radiate? Why is this?
davenn
davenn is offline
#11
Aug25-13, 07:31 AM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
davenn's Avatar
P: 2,243
So this basically means the more the atoms are banged about the more they radiate? Why is this?
because the collisions cause an increase in temperature
Bang a piece of metal plate with a hammer ... you will find that both the head of the hammer and the metal plate get warm

Dave
eightsquare
eightsquare is offline
#12
Aug25-13, 07:32 AM
P: 96
I know that. I'm asking WHY this increase in temperature causes more radiation.
mfb
mfb is offline
#13
Aug25-13, 07:33 AM
Mentor
P: 10,809
Collisions lead to accelerated charges, and those produce radiation.
More unordered motion -> more (and higher-energetic) collisions.
davenn
davenn is offline
#14
Aug25-13, 07:35 AM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
davenn's Avatar
P: 2,243
trying to think of an example if something that gets hotter the faster it moves ....

take a jet fighter ... it does ... its metal skin warms up. and altho the fighter travelling at say, mach 1 ( the speed of sound) has lots of kinetic energy, its not that that is warming the metal skin up.
Its the friction of that metal against the air ( air resistance). if you flew that fighter in a vacuum (with no air)
then the skin wouldnt warm up .... no friction generated heat

cheers
Dave
eightsquare
eightsquare is offline
#15
Aug25-13, 07:42 AM
P: 96
Quote Quote by mfb View Post
Collisions lead to accelerated charges, and those produce radiation.
More unordered motion -> more (and higher-energetic) collisions.
Perfect. Thanks for the answers.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
How does one measure the absolute velocity of an object? Special & General Relativity 43
how antenna radiates? Electrical Engineering 43
Question about energy of a speeding object, hitting a stationary object. General Physics 1
A 10 kg object is dropped from 100m above. What is the kinetic energy of the object r Introductory Physics Homework 2