sadhu
- 155
- 0
why do visible light have less heating affect than infra red radiations ,in spite of the fact that photon of visible light have more energy...
The discussion centers around the heating effects of visible light compared to infrared radiation, exploring why visible light, despite having higher energy photons, may have different heating impacts. Participants examine concepts related to energy absorption, the behavior of different light sources, and the implications of conservation of energy in heating applications.
Participants express differing views on the heating effects of visible light versus infrared radiation, with no consensus reached on the relative effectiveness of each in heating applications. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specifics of energy absorption and heating outcomes.
Participants mention the complexities of light emission spectra and the absorption characteristics of various materials, indicating that these factors may influence the heating effects but are not fully resolved in the discussion.
pixel01 said:OK, visible light have more energy than IR. But the percentage of total energy to heat the absober may be less .
russ_watters said:It doesn't. Visible light is more energetic, which means for the same number of photons, you get more heat when you absorb it.
Think about conservation of energy, where does the energy from the light go? What happens if you shine visible light on a black surface? What happens if you shine the same amount of visible light on a white surface? Are most surfaces "black" or "white" to infra red?sadhu said:why do visible light have less heating affect than infra red radiations ,in spite of the fact that photon of visible light have more energy...
Fluorescent lamps produce mostly UV light. When the UV strikes the coating on the lamp, it causes the coating to fluoresce, emitting visible light.sadhu said:ok then why does a fluorescent tube is less hot then a bulb after sane time
certainly glass absorbs far more infra red radiations than visible light , but the thing is same with other substances , otherwise why don't we use a bulb to warm the room instead of heater of same power ..?
No one said you did. But it is a logical contradiction that you were operating under, to believe something that was more energetic could produce less heat.sadhu said:well i never said that IR is more energetic
Exactly. Assuming that they are all completely absorbed 1 W of IR heats the same as 1 W of UV which heats the same as 1 W of visible light which heats the same as 1 W of radio ...sadhu said:ok then you mean to say that visible light have same heating affect like IR provided they are absorbed by the substances ...
and a heater and bulb of same power will heat a room equally
thanks now i get it...