Differentiating Black Body Energy Density: Seeking Answers

The Bob
Messages
1,126
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

I hope everyone is well and that life is treating you all good.

I am going to be honest with my question and say that I have not tried to do it myself yet. I, unfortunately, do not have time now to try and then repost so I do hope you will all forgive me for just stating a question. I do intent to attempt it tonight incase I can do it but for safety sake I am going to ask here as well, as on inspection it does not look to simple.

I will also say that this is for a University problem set that I have to do so, in a way it is homework. If the Mentors wish to move the thread then please do so and let me know via the messaging service please.

The problem is this: I need to differentiate the formula for the Energy Density of a Black Body:

U(\nu) = \frac{8 \pi \nu^3 h}{c^3 (e^{\frac{h \nu}{kT}} - 1)}

So I need: \frac{dU}{d \nu} = 0

As I said, I have not attempted it but please assume I understand the main rules of A-leve Mathematics. Again, I apologise for not having attempted it but I am in a rush and really cannot do it before I go. I will attempt it tonight and report what I find tomorrow but it maybe too little too late.

Thanks in advance.

The Bob (2004 ©)

P.S. Please note that there is a h (for Planck's Constant) missing from the numberate of the equation and that dU by dv needs to equal 0, in the end. See next post.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Correct equations

U(\nu) = \frac{8 \pi \nu^3 h}{c^3 (e^{\frac{h \nu}{kT}} - 1)}

and

\frac{dU}{d \nu} = 0

Cheers,

The Bob (2004 ©)
 
As promised, I attempted the differentiation myself last night.

I got to \frac{dU}{d \nu} = \frac{8 \pi h \nu^2}{c^3} \cdot \frac{e^{\frac{h \nu}{kT}}(3 - \frac{h \nu}{kT}) - 3}{e^{\frac{h \nu}{kT}(e^{\frac{h \nu}{kT} - 2) + 1}

but something tells me I did the differentiation wrong in the first place. I used the equation as a quotient but did nothing with the T, because it is a constant for different graphs but can be varied.

Can anyone shine a million watt torch's light on this problem please.

Cheers,

The Bob (2004 ©)
 
Don't worry about it guys. I solved it for low frequencies and had the correct magnitude. I also used Maple for a more accurate value.

Thanks for all the help. :smile:

The Bob (2004 ©)
 
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