Could you focus light from Sol's corona?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter negativzero
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Corona Focus Light
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the feasibility of focusing light from the Sun's corona to heat an object to temperatures exceeding that of the Sun's surface. Participants explore theoretical implications, optical challenges, and the nature of coronal radiation in the context of a total solar eclipse.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose using a large "magnifying glass" during a total solar eclipse to block light from the Sun's surface, suggesting it might allow for heating an object to over 6000 K using coronal light.
  • Others argue that the temperature achieved would need to relate to a mean temperature over a full sphere, raising concerns about the optics required for such an experiment.
  • One participant questions the significance of the "spread" of frequencies in black body radiation and expresses uncertainty about how coronal light compares to it.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the hot spot would lose heat to the Sun and suggests that surrounding it with a 'blanket' could reduce heat loss.
  • Some participants assert that the corona is not opaque and highlight its low density and high temperature, noting that its primary radiative mode is in X-rays, with visible light output being relatively low.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the feasibility of heating an object using coronal light, with some supporting the idea and others challenging its practicality and underlying assumptions. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations related to the assumptions about the corona's opacity, density, and the nature of its radiation, as well as the complexities involved in achieving the desired optical effects.

negativzero
Messages
120
Reaction score
0
For instance, if you put a big "magnifying glass" above the atmosphere in the shadow of a total solar eclipse thus blocking out light from the "surface of the sun", could you heat an object to a temperature hotter than the surface of the sun? Applying the Second Law, one can't raise the temperature of a hotter object using the heat from a cooler object, not even by focusing light from the cool object with a magnifying glass. However, since the corona is typically at higher temperature than the surface, it seems feasible that one might be able focus enough of the coronal light to get more than 6000 K concentrated in a small spot. I'm assuming that since it's a total eclipse the radiation from the surface wouldn't dominate the spread of energies focused. I can't imagine what device would be used for such an experiment, or what the utility of it might be except perhaps to explode a tritium BB or something.
 
Science news on Phys.org
Hmm - that's an idea. The snag is that the temperature achieved would have to relate to a mean temperature over a full sphere. The optics to achieve that would be a bit taxing. For a start, the Moon, getting in the way, is far cooler than the body of the Sun. You could possibly do better without the eclipse and use the focussed radiation from the main body to 'blanket' the object that you wanted to heat up to more than 6000K.
 
Sounds right. "Blanket"? Do you have a synonym?
I haven't thought about design. Assuming that one is projecting an image on a surface, it seems like it would a nice trick to somehow exclude any disc at all from appearing on the image. I have no idea how to bend light around corners but perhaps an object or series of objects and a series or cascade of light bends might shrink the appearance of any disc to a lesser significance. It also bothers me that i don't quiet get the significance of the "spread" of frequencies that make black body so important in heating. I assume coronal light is far from black body radiation, but I'm naive.
 
negativzero said:
Sounds right. "Blanket"? Do you have a synonym?
The 'hot spot' would be losing heat not only back to the Sun - just as it will not be getting all the available heat from the Sun. If you surrounded the hot spot with a 'blanket' of his temperature then there would be less heat loss. That's an entirely practical comment.
About "black Body' radiation, you need to read about it to get the full story but the notion was studied way back by Lord Rayleigh and Jeans. If you take a cavity and allow it to fill with EM energy until it's in thermal equilibrium, you will end up with a balance of all frequencies, sharing the energy. The classical approach to this gave the answer that there would be more and more energy with increasing frequency (The Ultraviolet Catastrophe). Planck solved this anomaly by applying Quantum theory to the problem and produced a shape for the spectrum that achieves a balance between the energies at all frequencies. If you take an ideal cavity and make a small hole in it, the hole will behave like an ideal black body. And, of course, if you look into the hole and if the cavity is only at room temperature, it will look black because any light that gets into the hole will never get out. The cavity will look red / orange / blue-white, depending on the temperature of the cavity.
Do some Googling!
 
negativzero said:
For instance, if you put a big "magnifying glass" above the atmosphere in the shadow of a total solar eclipse thus blocking out light from the "surface of the sun", could you heat an object to a temperature hotter than the surface of the sun?
No - the corona isn't opaque.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sophiecentaur
negativzero said:
For instance, if you put a big "magnifying glass" above the atmosphere in the shadow of a total solar eclipse thus blocking out light from the "surface of the sun", could you heat an object to a temperature hotter than the surface of the sun?
ohhh my gosh, seriously ? :DD

russ_watters said:
No - the corona isn't opaque.

yup, and it is also VERY tenuous ( low density), it also has a temperature of over 1 million K
and finally it's primary radiative mode is in X-rays ... the visible light output is relatively low in comparisonDave
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sophiecentaur

Similar threads

  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
11K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
9K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
13K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
8K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K