Blackbody radiation and Planck's distribution

Pachito
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
physics books on the topic of blackbody radiation say that any given object when heated will emit a continuous electromagnetic radiation which depends only on temperature. Planck's distribution based on discretization of energy states accurately describes this phenomenon.
But is this true?
If I put some hydrogen gas in a container and heat it up, will not it emit light at specific frequencies and not continuously?
Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There is a small flaw in your reasoning: The classical 'black body' radiator is a solid substance. Hydrogen gas, or any other gas, is not a solid body.
 
SteamKing said:
There is a small flaw in your reasoning: The classical 'black body' radiator is a solid substance. Hydrogen gas, or any other gas, is not a solid body.

That's not quite correct. The assumption that leads to the blackbody spectrum is just that you have an (approximate) continuum of quantum states over the range of the energies that can be significantly excited by the thermal environment. A gas can be a perfectly fine approximate blackbody over a range of temperatures. It's when the temperature gets into the range where you can excite the ionization spectrum of the gas (which can be VERY noncontinuous) that the blackbody approximation breaks down. But even then the sun is a pretty good blackbody, and it's a gas.
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top