Finding a constant of proportionality (Astro)

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem related to the relationship between wavelength and frequency in the context of astrophysics, specifically involving the central galaxy in the Perseus cluster and its X-ray spectrum described by a power law.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the conversion between wavelength and frequency, questioning how to derive the exponent β from the given power law. There are attempts to manipulate the expressions for Fλ and Fv, with some participants expressing uncertainty about their reasoning and calculations.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing feedback on each other's reasoning. Some guidance has been offered regarding the correct manipulation of the power laws, and there is an ongoing exploration of the implications of different interpretations of the relationships between the variables.

Contextual Notes

Participants express confusion over the signs and values of β, indicating a need for clarity in the mathematical relationships. The problem involves understanding how to express one variable in terms of another while maintaining the correct proportionality.

lquinnl
Messages
26
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



OK so I'm doing a past exam paper as some revision:

The central galaxy in the Perseus cluster has an X-ray spectrum in wavelength units
which is well described by the power law

[tex]F_\lambda \propto \lambda^{-2}[/tex] .

If the spectrum in frequency units is described by

[tex]F_v \propto v^\beta[/tex],

calculate [tex]\beta[/tex] .

Homework Equations



Obviously we have [tex]v = \frac{c}{\lambda}[/tex]


The Attempt at a Solution



so if [tex]v = \frac{c}{\lambda}[/tex]

then does that mean that [tex]\beta = -3[/tex]

I feel like I am really missing the point here. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How did you get -3?
 
Because lambda is to the power of -2 and lambda is related to frequency as v = c lambda^{-1} therefore adding an extra -1

does that make sense or is it total *@~% ?
 
I really cannot follow this logic. How does this "adding" come about?
 
Because

λ-1 λ-2 = λ-3

Am I on the right lines?
 
No, you are not. You really need to think how one could go from wavelength to frequency in a formula.
 
Looking at this again I am not convinced of my reasoning. I have this:

[tex]F_\lambda \propto \lambda^{-2}[/tex] .



[tex]F_v \propto v^{-\beta}[/tex] .



[tex]F_v \propto v^{-\beta} \propto {\frac{c}{\lambda}}^{-\beta}[/tex] .

Any chance of a poke in the right direction, if you know?
 
You have a formula that contains [itex]\lambda^{-2}[/itex].

You need to express this formula via [itex]\nu[/itex]. How would you do it?
 
voko said:
You have a formula that contains [itex]\lambda^{-2}[/itex].

You need to express this formula via [itex]\nu[/itex]. How would you do it?

[tex]F_\lambda \propto \lambda^{-2} \propto (v^{-1})^{-2} \propto v^{-3}[/tex]

[tex]v \propto \lambda^{-1}[/tex]

[tex]F_v \propto v^{\beta} \propto \lambda^{-1} \propto (v^{-3})^{-1} \propto v^{-4}[/tex]

so [tex]\beta = 4[/tex]

?

P.s. Thanks for all this help.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
lquinnl said:
[tex]F_\lambda \propto \lambda^{-2} \propto (v^{-1})^{-2}[/tex]

This part is correct.

But [itex](\nu^{-1})^{-2}[/itex] is NOT [itex]\nu^{-3}[/itex]. I note that you made a similar mistake in another derivation. What is the proper result of such an operation?
 
  • #11
But [itex](\nu^{-1})^{-2}[/itex] is NOT [itex]\nu^{-3}[/itex]. I note that you made a similar mistake in another derivation. What is the proper result of such an operation?

OF COURSE! I feel so stupid today, really need to wake up!

[tex](v^{-1})^{-2} = v^{2}[/tex]

so

[tex]F_v \propto v^{\beta} \propto \lambda^{-1} \propto (v^{2})^{-1} \propto v^{-2}[/tex]

and

[tex]\beta = 2[/tex]

Am I Right?
 
Last edited:
  • #12
Or have I messed up still, regarding a sign?
 
  • #13
lquinnl said:
But [itex](\nu^{-1})^{-2}[/itex] is NOT [itex]\nu^{-3}[/itex]. I note that you made a similar mistake in another derivation. What is the proper result of such an operation?

OF COURSE! I feel so stupid today, really need to wake up!

[tex](v^{-1})^{-2} = v^{2}[/tex]

This is correct. But what you do then puzzles me. You have just proved that since

[itex]\lambda^{-2} \propto \nu^{2}[/itex]

we have

[itex]F \propto \lambda^{-2} \propto \nu ^{2}[/itex]
 
  • #14
What I'm saying is that

[tex]F_\lambda \propto \lambda^{-2} \propto v^{2}[/tex]

from [tex]v = \frac{c}{\lambda}[/tex] we have [tex]v \propto \lambda^{-1}[/tex]

so

[tex]F_v \propto \lambda^{-1}[/tex]

now i think maybe this should be how i follow:so

[tex]F_v \propto v^{\beta} \propto (\lambda^{-1})\propto(v^{2})^{-1}[/tex]
 
Last edited:
  • #15
Again, you just got the expression in terms of [itex]v^{2}[/itex]. While you know it should be in terms of [itex]v^{\beta}[/itex]. What does this mean to you?
 
  • #16
voko said:
Again, you just got the expression in terms of [itex]v^{2}[/itex]. While you know it should be in terms of [itex]v^{\beta}[/itex]. What does this mean to you?

So if [tex]F_v \propto v^{\beta} \propto v^{-2}[/tex]

[tex]\beta = -2[/tex]
 
  • #17
Why is this MINUS 2? Just two messages above it was PLUS 2.
 
  • #18
I thought it should be minus 2 from this statement:

[tex]F_v \propto v^{\beta} \propto (\lambda^{-1})\propto(v^{2})^{-1}[/tex][/QUOTE]
 
  • #19
I think you are very confused. Let me explain the whole thing to you.

When something (A) is proportional something else (B), then A = CB, where C does not contain B in any way.

In your case, you have F proportional to [itex]\lambda^{-2}[/itex], which means [itex]F = k\lambda^{-2}[/itex]

You are asked to find out to what degree of [itex]\nu[/itex] that is proportional. This is done by expressing [itex]\lambda[/itex] via [itex]\nu[/itex], which is [itex]\lambda = c\nu^{-1}[/itex], so you end up with [itex]F = k(c\nu^{-1})^{-2} = kc^{-2}\nu^{2}[/itex], which simply means that [itex]F \propto \nu^{2}[/itex] and [itex]\beta = 2[/itex].
 
  • #20
THANK YOU VERY MUCH!

I feel like I have done an incredible job of over-complicating this problem!

I think I was getting confused by the fact we have F_v and F_lambda.

So it was just a case of expressing wavelength as frequency and amalgamating the powers.

Seems incredibly straightforward now!

Thanks again
 

Similar threads

Replies
39
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K