Black body radiation, question arising from a book

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between frequency and wavelength in black body radiation, specifically addressing a statement from a textbook regarding the peak positions in their respective distributions. Participants explore the implications of these peaks and the mathematical relationships involved, focusing on the spectral energy densities and their integration across frequency and wavelength.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation, Conceptual clarification, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about how a peak frequency does not correspond to a peak wavelength as suggested in the textbook.
  • Another participant explains that the peaks in spectral energy densities are meaningful only when integrated over a bandwidth, introducing the concept of energy density functions.
  • A later reply questions the derivative relationship between frequency and wavelength, seeking clarification on the mathematical expression for the derivative.
  • Another participant provides the derivative relationship, stating that it follows from the basic relationship between frequency and wavelength.
  • One participant inquires whether the peak in frequency is shifted by a specific factor compared to the peak in wavelength, indicating a potential misunderstanding or need for further clarification.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the implications of the peaks in frequency and wavelength, and there remains uncertainty regarding the relationship between them and how it affects calculations related to black body radiation.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes unresolved mathematical steps and assumptions regarding the dependence of peak positions on temperature, as well as the integration of spectral energy densities.

fluidistic
Gold Member
Messages
3,934
Reaction score
286
In the book "Introduction to the structure of matter" by Brehm and Mullin, page 78. They say "It should be empathized that there is no reason for the peak positions \mu _m and \lambda _m in the respective distributions to be connected by the relation c=\mu \lambda. They are talking about the blackbody frequency and wavelength spectra. On a graph the independent variable would be either \mu or \lambda and the dependent variable, M_ \mu (T) or M _\lambda (T).

I do not understand at all how, for a given temperature, a body would emit a peak of frequency \mu _m that does not correspond to a peak of wavelength given by the formula \lambda _m =\frac{c}{\mu _m}.
Can you explain to me what's going on?
 
Science news on Phys.org
I know I am going to explain this poorly but...

It has to do with the fact that we look at the energy over a bandwidth of frequency or wavelength. These peaks are the peaks in the spectral energy densities, which I will call the function \rho. By itself, \rho is meaningless because it is a density. If you wish to find the actual energy you need to integrate it across the frequency or wavelength. Thus, the actual infinitesimal energy is
\rho(\nu)d\nu
\rho(\lambda)d\lambda
This is kind of like the same thing that happens when we talk about wavefunctions in that the magnitude is the probability density but the meaningful probability is |\Psi(x)|^2dx.

Ok, so the peak energies should be the same, thus,

\rho(\nu)d\nu = \rho(\lambda)d\lambda
\rho(\nu)\left| \frac{d\nu}{d\lambda} \right| = \rho(\lambda)
\rho(\nu) \frac{c}{\lambda^2} = \rho(\lambda)

Now using this relation you can properly account for the difference in the peak energy densities.
 
Sorry for being so late on this, but thank you.
However can you explain me why \big | \frac{d \nu }{d \lambda} \big |=c/\lambda ^2?
Because there's a problem in Brehm's book that asks me to calculate the product \nu _m \lambda _m and to realize that it's not worth c. Though I must "consider the derivations of the dependence of \nu _m and \lambda _m on the temperature".
 
Because the relationship between frequency and wavelength is c = \lambda \nu. Thus,
\frac{d\nu}{d\lambda} = \frac{d}{d\lambda} \frac{c}{\lambda} = -\frac{c}{\lambda^2}
 
Ah ok thank you.
So does this mean that the peak in the frequency \nu is shifted by a factor \frac{c}{\lambda ^2 } compared to the peak in the wavelength \lambda?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
9K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
17K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K