Help with Blackbody: Doubling \lambda_{max} with Temp Increase

  • Thread starter Thread starter tony873004
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Blackbody
tony873004
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
1,753
Reaction score
143
At a given temperature, \lambda_{max} for a blackbody cavity = 6500 angstroms. What will \lambda_{max} be if the temperature of the cavity walls is increased so that the rate of emission of spectral radiation is doubled?

<br /> R_T = \sigma T^4 \,\,\,\, \Rightarrow \,\,\,\,T^4 = \frac{{R_T }}{\sigma }\,\,\,\, \Rightarrow \,\,\,\,T = \sqrt[4]{{\frac{{R_T }}{\sigma }}}\,\,\,<br />

\lambda _{{\rm{max}}} = \frac{\alpha }{T}

\lambda _{{\rm{max,2}}} = \frac{\alpha }{{T_2 }} = \frac{\alpha }{{\sqrt[4]{{\frac{{R_{T,2} }}{\sigma }}}}} = \frac{\alpha }{{\sqrt[4]{{\frac{{2R_{T,1} }}{\sigma }}}}}

Just looking at the formula, it seems the answer should be \frac{1}{{\sqrt[4]{2}}} = 0.84\,\lambda _{{\rm{max,1}}}

But shouldn't the max wavelength go up if the temperature is going up?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


It just dawned on me. Shoudn't the frequency to up, causing the wavelength to shorten, in which case, I might have done it correctly? Can someone double check that I did this right?
 


tony873004 said:
It just dawned on me. Shoudn't the frequency to up, causing the wavelength to shorten, in which case, I might have done it correctly? Can someone double check that I did this right?

Yes, higher energies mean higher frequencies and shorter wavelengths; it looks good to me:approve:
 
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