Obtaining the Rayleigh-Jeans formula - what am I doing wrong?

  • Thread starter quasar_4
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Formula
In summary, the student is trying to solve for the spectral energy density of a blackbody radiation, but is having difficulty doing so. They are using the Rayleigh-Jeans formula, but are having trouble solving for the energy du of the radiation. The Rayleigh-Jeans formula states that the energy du of a blackbody radiation per unit volume is proportional to the spectral energy density as a function of the wavelength and the energy du can be simplified to be proportional to the spectral energy density multiplied by the wavelength.
  • #1
quasar_4
290
0
Obtaining the Rayleigh-Jeans formula - what am I doing wrong??

Homework Statement



Spectral energy density = [tex] u(\nu, T) = {\[\displaystyle \,8\,\pi \,h{\nu}^{3}{c}^{-3} \left( {{\rm e}^{{\frac {h\nu}{kT}}}}-1 \right) ^{-1}\]} [/tex]
where h is Planck's constant and k is Bolzmann's constant.

Using the relation [tex] \lambda = \frac{c}{\nu} [/tex] express the spectral energy density as a function of the wavelength and determine the energy du of a blackbody radiation per unit volume, in a narrow range of wavelength [tex] \lambda + d\lambda [/tex]. Using an expansion of the exponential factor obtain the Rayleigh-Jeans formula,
[tex] du = \frac{8 \pi k T}{\lambda^4} d\lambda [/tex]

Homework Equations



Given some function [tex] f(x_1, x_2, ..., x_n) [/tex],

[tex] df = \left(\frac{\partial{f}}{\partial{x_1}}\right) dx_1 + ... + \left(\frac{\partial{f}}{\partial{x_n}}\right) dx_n [/tex].

Also, [tex] e^{x} \approx 1+x+\frac{x^2}{2!} + ... [/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution



It seems like it should be easy, but I can't get the equation to come out right. Substituting in lambda, I get

[tex]{\[\displaystyle {\it u}\, = \,8\,\pi \,h{\lambda}^{-3} \left( {{\rm e}^{{\frac {hc}{\lambda\,kT}}}}-1 \right) ^{-1}\]} [/tex]

Then from my equation in part b, we should have that

[tex] du = \frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{\lambda}} d\lambda [/tex]

But I get

[tex] \frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{\lambda}} = {\[\displaystyle \,-8\,\pi \,h \left( 3\,\lambda\,kT{{\rm e}^{{\frac {hc}{\lambda\,kT}}}}-3\,\lambda\,kT-hc{{\rm e}^{{\frac {hc}{\lambda\,kT}}}} \right) {\lambda}^{-5} \left( {{\rm e}^{{\frac {hc}{\lambda\,kT}}}}-1 \right) ^{-2}{k}^{-1}{T}^{-1}\]} [/tex]

Upon using my expansion for the exp. term (expanding around nu = 0, then substituting in nu = c/lambda) the most I can simplify this is to:

[tex] du ={\[\displaystyle \,8\,\pi \, \left( -2\,ckT+{\frac {h{c}^{2}}{\lambda}} \right) {\lambda}^{-3}{c}^{-2}\]}d\lambda [/tex]

so... what am I doing wrong?? It could have something to do with the [tex] \lambda + d\lambda [/tex] (though I just thought that meant I could neglect higher than 2nd order terms in my expansion)...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2


A quick check of the units of your original equation, [tex]u(\nu,T)=8h\pi\nu^3 c^{-3} \left(e^{\frac{h\nu}{kT} }-1\right)^{-1}[/tex] suggests that the problem lies there, not with your method.

If you are having doubts about whether or not using [itex]du=\frac{\partial u}{\partial\lambda}d\lambda[/itex] makes sense, another way to look at it is to realize that the spread in energy over the interval [itex]\lambda[/itex] to [itex]\lambda+ d\lambda[/itex] is defined as [itex]du=u(\lambda+d\lambda)-u(\lambda)[/itex]. And for infinitesimal [itex]d\lambda[/itex], a quick Taylor expansion gives [itex]u(\lambda+d\lambda)=u(\lambda)+\frac{\partial u}{\partial \lambda}d\lambda[/itex], from which the result follows.
 
  • #3


Interesting. This is an exam problem (from a previous year) at my school, so maybe the question has a typo. I can't see what else one would do to solve for this equation.
 
  • #4


I must apologize, I was thinking [itex]u[/itex] was just an energy density (units of Joules/m3), not a spectral energy density. Your original equation is just fine. However, you can't simply substitute [itex]\nu=\frac{c}{\lambda}[/itex] into your frequency spectral energy density equation and get a wavelength spectral energy density out of it.

In terms of frequency, the spectral energy density has units of Joule-seconds/m3. While in terms of wavelength, the spectral energy density has units of Joules/m4. The first is defined as an energy density per unit frequency, while the latter is defined as an energy density per unit wavelength. For this reason, [itex]u(\lambda,T)d\lambda=u(\nu,T)d\nu[/itex]. Or, [itex]u(\lambda,T)=u(\nu,T)\frac{d\nu}{d\lambda}=u(\nu,T)\times\frac{-c}{\lambda^2}[/itex]
 
  • #5


When we substitute d[itex]\nu[/itex]/d[itex]\lambda[/itex] = - c / [itex]\lambda[/itex]^2 in Plancks law of Black body radiation (in frequency), we would get an equation that is same as Plancks law of black body radiation (in wavelength) EXCEPT for a negative sign.

Because it is an ENERGY equation, the negative sign would be omitted.

Is this correct
 

1. What is the Rayleigh-Jeans formula?

The Rayleigh-Jeans formula is a mathematical equation that describes the energy distribution of blackbody radiation at different frequencies. It was developed by Lord Rayleigh and Sir James Jeans in the early 1900s.

2. How is the Rayleigh-Jeans formula derived?

The Rayleigh-Jeans formula is derived from classical electromagnetic theory, specifically the equipartition theorem which states that the energy of a system is equally distributed among all possible modes of motion. By applying this principle to blackbody radiation, the formula can be derived.

3. What is the purpose of obtaining the Rayleigh-Jeans formula?

The Rayleigh-Jeans formula is used to understand and predict the behavior of blackbody radiation, which is important in many scientific fields such as astrophysics and cosmology. It also helped pave the way for the development of quantum mechanics.

4. What are some common mistakes when trying to obtain the Rayleigh-Jeans formula?

Some common mistakes include not properly applying the equipartition theorem, using incorrect units or variables, and not considering the limitations of classical physics at high frequencies. It is important to carefully follow the derivation steps and double check all calculations.

5. How accurate is the Rayleigh-Jeans formula?

The Rayleigh-Jeans formula is accurate at low frequencies, but it fails to accurately predict the behavior of blackbody radiation at high frequencies. This is known as the ultraviolet catastrophe and was one of the reasons why quantum mechanics was developed to better explain this phenomenon.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
697
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
0
Views
652
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
919
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top