Where is the quantization term in Planck's Law?

[Taulant Sholla]

TL;DR Summary

Where is the quantization term (the "n") in Planck's Law?

This is a very remedial question, so thanks in advance for you gentle indulgence Where do I find the quantization term (the "n") in Planck's Law?

 

[vanhees71]

I've no clue what you mean. I've never heard about a mysterious "quantization term". You get this equation by calculating the partion sum of the free quantized electromagnetic field.

 

[Taulant Sholla]

Really? No clue?

Planck coughed-up his equation that nicely fit Blackbody radiation curves. His great step was to state that energy occurs in discrete levels. Where is this discreteness found or how is it manifested in this law? Or is it not found in this law and simply contained in E=hf?

 

[vanhees71]

It's found in the derivation of the said partition sum ;-)).

 

[Taulant Sholla]

With all due respect and utmost appreciation (really, thank you for your insights!) -- your responses provide zero assistance to a poster who clearly advertised the questions as intro/remedial. Maybe there's another forum where I should post this? Or maybe another responder might jump in?

 

[weirdoguy]

your responses provide zero assistance to a poster who clearly advertised the questions as intro/remedial.

You used phrase "quantization term" which I personally (and I suppose @vanhees71 also) did not see in any textbook. If you mean some natural paremeter $n$ like in Bohr quantisation then there is non in Planck's law. If you ask:

Where is this discreteness found

then vanhees71 answered:

It's found in the derivation of the said partition sum ;-))

If you ask where to find the derivation, well, The Conceptual Framework of Quantum Field Theory by Duncan comes to my mind, but that is quite an advanced book. He discusses it in historical context in the first chapter. Maybe others will provide simpler references.

 

[Taulant Sholla]

That was not my question. I was just asking for a very simplified response to an admittedly remedial question. I posted to physics stack exchange and got what I needed.

 

[vanhees71]

I'm sorry that I answered to your question, which doesn't make sense to begin with. If you ask for a derivation of Planck's radiation law, I've of course assumed that you are familiar with the basics of quantum field theory and how to evaluate partition sums for non-interacting particles.

 

[weirdoguy]

That was not my question.

Then you should work on phrasing your questions properly. We can only answer to what we see.

 

[PeterDonis]

I posted to physics stack exchange and got what I needed.

Then this thread is closed.