Heat and Infrared radiated from an object

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter LightningInAJar
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Heat Infrared
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between heat energy and infrared (IR) radiation emitted by heated objects. Participants explore whether there is a direct correlation between the two, the nature of IR radiation, and its implications in various contexts, including medical applications and bioluminescence.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether there is a direct 1-to-1 relationship between heat energy and IR radiation, suggesting that IR can increase without a corresponding increase in heat.
  • One participant notes that IR is part of a broader electromagnetic spectrum and emphasizes that different parts of this spectrum can produce heat in various ways.
  • Another participant asserts that most objects follow Planck's Law, indicating a relationship where hotter objects emit more radiation, including IR.
  • Concerns are raised about the potential for IR radiation therapy to produce heat, with one participant questioning if high levels of heat are necessary for effective IR therapy.
  • There is a discussion about the differences between incandescence and bioluminescence, particularly regarding heat production and light emission.
  • One participant mentions that bioluminescence could potentially emit light in the IR spectrum under certain conditions, although it is generally not effective for visibility.
  • A specific example of a deep-sea fish using near-IR light for hunting is provided, illustrating the complexities of light perception in different environments.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between heat and IR radiation, with no consensus reached on whether a direct correlation exists or the implications of IR radiation in therapeutic contexts. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives.

Contextual Notes

Some statements reflect confusion or ambiguity regarding the definitions of heat and temperature, as well as the nature of IR radiation and its effects. The discussion also touches on the complexities of light emission mechanisms in biological systems.

LightningInAJar
Messages
274
Reaction score
36
TL;DR
Infrared without heat?
Dumb question.

Is there a direct heat energy relationship between a heated object and infrared radiation? 1 to 1 relationship? Or can IR go up without there being much heat?
 
Science news on Phys.org
Your question has a couple of oops statements I think.
And this answer will not really answer your questions since I'm confused
For heat let's use degrees K (or Celsius). Ok?
The first problem is that IR is just a part of a spectrum: gamma rays, x-rays, ultraviolet, visible, microwave, IR, radio. So microwaves make "heat" when they hit water molecules, for example. Visible light feels warm on your skin. So it can "heat" your skin, as another example. IR can do the same thing.

gamma rays can disrupt chemical bonds.

So, help me out here. What do you want to know? This is a huge topic.
Sorry for the marginal answer, best I could do.
 
Also pleas tell us if you are interested in heat or temperature
 
There's nothing special about the infrared spectrum, excepting that - at the temperatures we're used to, on Earth - it makes up the bulk of thermal radiative emission/absorption.
 
LightningInAJar said:
Is there a direct heat energy relationship between a heated object and infrared radiation? 1 to 1 relationship? Or can IR go up without there being much heat?
Assuming you are asking about the IR emitted by a hot object, there is absolutely a relationship. Most objects closely obey Planck's Law, which let's us calculate how much power is emitted by an object in various electromagnetic frequencies, including IR. In general, the hotter something is, the more radiation it emits and the higher the average frequency of this radiation is. So an ice cube emits less radiation than my big fat cat who's occupying my lap currently, and the radiation the ice cube emits is of a lower frequency on average.

This is why heating up a piece of metal turns it first red, then orange, then white and explains why it becomes increasingly brighter as it heats up. At first the temperature is too low to emit hardly any visible light, so the metal is just its normal color, though it might me scalding hot and you can feel the IR radiation it emits if you hold a hand close to it. Once the metal heats up a bit more it becomes a dull red and you can see it glowing, even in the dark. Hotter still and it becomes orange, then yellow, then white. As it gets yellow and then near white the amount of radiation it emits in the visible frequencies is so much that it could light up a room. As well it should, as this is exactly how an incandescent light bulb functions.

Hotter still, such as when arc welding, and you start to get appreciable amounts of UV radiation. This is why they say never watch someone welding or you'll hurt your eyes.

Note that as you increase the temperature the amount of radiation produced at ALL frequencies increases. So metal that's white hot is emitting more IR radiation than when it was red hot.

Also, keep in mind that the color vs temperature scales you see online usually work pretty well for your eye, but not always for cameras, as the following video demonstrates:


More info:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_radiation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black-body_radiation
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BvU, jim mcnamara and russ_watters
jim mcnamara said:
Your question has a couple of oops statements I think.
And this answer will not really answer your questions since I'm confused
For heat let's use degrees K (or Celsius). Ok?
The first problem is that IR is just a part of a spectrum: gamma rays, x-rays, ultraviolet, visible, microwave, IR, radio. So microwaves make "heat" when they hit water molecules, for example. Visible light feels warm on your skin. So it can "heat" your skin, as another example. IR can do the same thing.

gamma rays can disrupt chemical bonds.

So, help me out here. What do you want to know? This is a huge topic.
Sorry for the marginal answer, best I could do.
I am interested in IR radiation therapy that some medical researchers experiment with, but was wondering if high levels of heat are needed for higher levels of IR radiation? Perhaps depends on the material? I know fireflies produce light between red and green and produce no heat at all. Are you sure visible light produces heat?
 
LightningInAJar said:
I am interested in IR radiation therapy that some medical researchers experiment with, but was wondering if high levels of heat are needed for higher levels of IR radiation?
Yes. All that IR radiation generated is absorbed by the person and felt as heat. There's no way to get around this if the goal is to pump IR radiation into someone.

LightningInAJar said:
I know fireflies produce light between red and green and produce no heat at all. Are you sure visible light produces heat?
Fireflies don't produce light via incandescence, which is what hot objects like incandescent light bulbs, hot metal bars, and stars do. Incandescence is the emission of electromagnetic radiation (including visible light) from a hot body as a result of its high temperature. Instead fireflies use bioluminescence, where a series of chemical reactions directly release light within a narrow band of frequencies. For fireflies there are several peaks in the spectrum between about 550 and 600 nm (source).

And just to be extra clear, there is a difference between something hot producing light vs light producing heat. A laser doesn't use heat to produce its light (by that I mean that the laser isn't incandescing), yet even lasers that use a tenth of the power of a common LED light bulb can burn through wood. Visible light produces heat when absorbed, as does all EM radiation including IR.

LightningInAJar said:
I am interested in IR radiation therapy that some medical researchers experiment with
What exactly are you trying to do? I hope you're not planning on using it on yourself or anyone else. Under no circumstances should you ever perform any 'therapy' or any other medical procedure on yourself or others unless instructed to by a doctor. Even something seemingly mundane like IR therapy might lead to skin problems (or potentially something else) over time. I can't remember what it's called, but I do remember hearing something about the heat from laptops messing up people's skin from prolonged use. So now we have people with skin problems on their upper legs and groin from simply using a laptop every day.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BvU
No, no self treatments. Just curious if one could get IR therapy without burning oneself.

bioluminescence can never emit light in IR spectrum?
 
LightningInAJar said:
bioluminescence can never emit light in IR spectrum?
Given the right molecules it might. It's just that IR radiation isn't a good way to 'see' due to its lower energy vs visible light. Visible light has enough energy to cause certain molecules to deform inside your eye, which is the first step in a cascade of reactions that enable you to see. IR, with its lower energy per photon, can't do this.
 
  • #10
  • #11
LightningInAJar said:
bioluminescence can never emit light in IR spectrum?
There's a deepsea nightmare fish that uses 708nm light (almost IR) to hunt prey

Everything at that depth has lost the red visual receptors (since red from the sun doesn't reach that far down, its useless).

So the fish has a flashlight : internally it starts off as blue-green luminescence, that absorbed by a protein which emits red, that through a brown filter that takes out almost everything, leaving only almost-IR. Which illuminates prey that can't see it.

But, the fish doesn't have any red receptors either.

Reflected light from the prey runs through a chlorophyll mechanism that upshifts it into the green which the fish does have receptors for.

As a final insult to sanity, the source of the chlorophyll is from the fish's prey's diet.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Drakkith
  • #12
hmmm27 said:
There's a deepsea nightmare fish that uses 708nm light (almost IR) to hunt prey

Everything at that depth has lost the red visual receptors (since red from the sun doesn't reach that far down, its useless).

So the fish has a flashlight : internally it starts off as blue-green luminescence, that absorbed by a protein which emits red, that through a brown filter that takes out almost everything, leaving only almost-IR. Which illuminates prey that can't see it.

But, the fish doesn't have any red receptors either.

Reflected light from the prey runs through a chlorophyll mechanism that upshifts it into the green which the fish does have receptors for.

As a final insult to sanity, the source of the chlorophyll is from the fish's prey's diet.
That's pretty interesting.
 
  • #13

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
8K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
11K
  • · Replies 152 ·
6
Replies
152
Views
11K