Blackbody Radiation (Rayleigh-Jean) Equipartion of Energy Question

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the derivation of the Rayleigh-Jean Law of blackbody radiation, specifically questioning the assignment of equipartition energy as kT per mode instead of the expected 1/2 kT. It is clarified that each mode behaves like a harmonic oscillator, contributing 1/2 kT, and the factor of two arises from the two polarization states for each wave-vector. The conversation also touches on the implications of polarization on the density of modes, noting that all components of the wave vector must share the same polarization to maintain the correct frequency dependence. Ultimately, the conclusion emphasizes that the degrees of freedom in the oscillator contribute equally from both kinetic and potential energy. Understanding these nuances is essential for grasping the principles of blackbody radiation.
uart
Science Advisor
Messages
2,797
Reaction score
21
There's one thing that has always puzzled me about the derivation of the old classical Rayleigh-Jean Law of blackbody radiation. I understand how they calculate the density of modes in the cavity however I don't see why they assign an "equipartition" energy of kT per mode instead of 1/2 kT as is used for example in the kinetic theory of gases to find the heat capacity of gases.

I'm pretty sure the correct "equipartiion" is 1/2 kT per mode and my hunch is that in the blackbody radiation derivation they use kT to allow for independent vertical/horizontal polarizations, though I've never seen this explicitly stated. Or is it 1/2 kT for the E field and another 1/2 kT for the B field, can someone please enlighten me as to the precise reason.

Thanks. :)
 
Science news on Phys.org
I don't know the answer to this specific question, though I will add that most likely when its a multiple of 1/2kT its due to another degree of freedom (as you have stated).
 
You treat each mode as a harmonic oscillator contributing (1/2)kT. Each mode can be labelled by its polarization and its wave-vector. The polarization takes two values for each value of the wave-vector--that's where the factor of two comes from. I.e., when you sum over modes in this case the sum over polarizations is trivial and just gives a factor of two.
 
So my hunch about polarization was correct. Thanks for confirming this guys.

One more question. Am I correct in thinking that the polarization must be the same for all three components of the wave vector. Otherwise you'd get a density of modes proportional to the 5th power of frequency instead of the correct result which is a 2nd power in freq {equiv to (-7)th power in Lambda instead of the correct (-4)th power of Lambda}. My electromagnetic is a bit rusty but I think it makes sense that all three components must have the same polarization - right?
 
polirization is the wrong answer. The degrees of freedom come from both the kinetic and the potential part of the oscillator with each part contributing one half.
 
I was watching a Khan Academy video on entropy called: Reconciling thermodynamic and state definitions of entropy. So in the video it says: Let's say I have a container. And in that container, I have gas particles and they're bouncing around like gas particles tend to do, creating some pressure on the container of a certain volume. And let's say I have n particles. Now, each of these particles could be in x different states. Now, if each of them can be in x different states, how many total...
Thread 'Why work is PdV and not (P+dP)dV in an isothermal process?'
Let's say we have a cylinder of volume V1 with a frictionless movable piston and some gas trapped inside with pressure P1 and temperature T1. On top of the piston lay some small pebbles that add weight and essentially create the pressure P1. Also the system is inside a reservoir of water that keeps its temperature constant at T1. The system is in equilibrium at V1, P1, T1. Now let's say i put another very small pebble on top of the piston (0,00001kg) and after some seconds the system...
Back
Top