Deriving the Total Energy from Blackbody Radiation: A Mathematical Approach

Xyius
Messages
501
Reaction score
4
This might be more of a mathematical question than a physical one. But I am taking a Quantum Mechanics course and the book starts out by introducing the equation for the energy density of radiation from a black body. They then integrate this expression over infinity to find the total energy per unit volume.

http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/5189/blackbody.jpg

My question is, how did they do the integral? It looks like they turned \frac{1}{e^{x}-1} into its geometric series representation. That part I understand. But what do they do in the step after that? Where does the geometric series go? And where does the \frac{1}{(n+1)^4} come from? And for that matter, the last line in the derivation?

I know its not an incredibly crucial question in understanding the Physics, but it bugs me a lot when I cannot follow the mathematics.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Well when you pull the sum out to the front of the integral, you have x^3e^{-(1+n)x}. Then when you substitute y = (n+1)x, you have to use x^3 dx= y^3dy / (n+1)^4. The integral can then be evaluated, presumably by parts, to get 6. Evaluating the sum is a bit tricky. If I was working through the derivation, I'd just be satisfied with looking up the answer. This page gives a few clever ways of doing it: http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/28329/nice-proofs-of-zeta4-pi4-90
 
Thank you!
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In her YouTube video Bell’s Theorem Experiments on Entangled Photons, Dr. Fugate shows how polarization-entangled photons violate Bell’s inequality. In this Insight, I will use quantum information theory to explain why such entangled photon-polarization qubits violate the version of Bell’s inequality due to John Clauser, Michael Horne, Abner Shimony, and Richard Holt known as the...
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
I asked a question related to a table levitating but I am going to try to be specific about my question after one of the forum mentors stated I should make my question more specific (although I'm still not sure why one couldn't have asked if a table levitating is possible according to physics). Specifically, I am interested in knowing how much justification we have for an extreme low probability thermal fluctuation that results in a "miraculous" event compared to, say, a dice roll. Does a...
Back
Top