CMB Flux Density: Deriving For Present Cosmology

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around deriving the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) flux density in the context of present cosmology, with a focus on calculations assuming a constant temperature for the CMB.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires about the derivation of CMB flux density, specifically for the current cosmological time, suggesting a constant temperature assumption.
  • Another participant notes that the CMB can be approximated as a perfect black body at a temperature of 2.725K and suggests using Planck's Law to compute the flux density.
  • A participant questions whether Planck's law applies to the CMB, emphasizing the need to consider the surface area of a 1 m² surface for energy absorption from the CMB.
  • Another participant argues that the isotropic nature of the CMB allows for direct application of Planck's law without needing to adjust for surface area, as it differs from light emitted from a star.
  • One participant proposes that the formula AσT^4 could be used for calculating total power absorbed, expressing surprise at the simplicity of the result.
  • A later reply confirms the use of AσT^4 for total power absorbed but cautions that the area "A" would depend on the measurement method, typically relating to the detector's beam area.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the application of Planck's law to the CMB and the appropriate considerations for calculating flux density, indicating that multiple competing views remain without consensus.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved aspects regarding the assumptions made in applying Planck's law to the CMB and the implications of isotropy on the calculations. The discussion also highlights the dependence on measurement methods for determining the area involved in calculations.

Nabeshin
Science Advisor
Messages
2,207
Reaction score
16
Does anyone know where I can find numbers (or how to derive) the CMB flux density (W/m^2)? I'm only really interested in our present cosmological time, so a solution may assume the CMB to be at a constant temperature.
 
Last edited:
Space news on Phys.org
Nabeshin said:
Does anyone know where I can find numbers (or how to derive) the CMB flux density (W/m^2)? I'm only really interested in our present cosmological time, so a solution may assume the CMB to be at a constant temperature.
Well, the CMB is almost a perfect black body as T=2.725K. So you can compute it directly from the black body spectrum (Planck's Law):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_body#Planck.27s_law_of_black-body_radiation
 
First, using Planck's law would give the energy radiated per unit surface area at that temperature, but that's per unit surface area of the radiating body, isn't it? In which case the surface area is... the entire universe?

What I'm interested in is if you have, say, a 1 m^2 surface, how much energy does it absorb from the cmb?

It's relatively easy to do this for a star or a single radiating black body, like a star, by computing total energy radiated and then spreading it evenly over a sphere of radius r. I don't really know how to extend this to the cmb though...
 
Nabeshin said:
First, using Planck's law would give the energy radiated per unit surface area at that temperature,
Also the energy absorbed per unit surface area. This works for the CMB because it's isotropic (as opposed to the light from a star which only comes from a small area of the sky). So you don't multiply that value by any area to get the flux density of the CMB.
 
So just [tex]A \sigma T^4[/tex] should work for total power absorbed, then? Interesting that it should turn out to be so simple!
 
Nabeshin said:
So just [tex]A \sigma T^4[/tex] should work for total power absorbed, then? Interesting that it should turn out to be so simple!
Yup. Just bear in mind that "A" there would be dependent upon how you are doing the measurement, and would typically be the area of the beam of the detector on a telescope.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
7K