How do you convert Planck's Radiation Formula into terms of wavelength?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nadeemo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula Radiation
nadeemo
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
Okay, so I know that Planck's Law states that,

u(v) dv = 8\pi v^{}3 / c^{}3(e^{}(hc/kT)-1)

to make this formula in terms of wavelength, do you just plug in c = v\lambda, or is there more to it? because what I get is not what I find on the net to be correct.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
sry for the bad looking equation, I am new to the forum :P
 
you cannot simply substitute because you are missing the dv, in the right hand side of the formula.

sure, you can just put lambda in terms of v, but at the end, you want to integrate over u(lambda) d lambda, so you need to change dv to dlambda, and that introduces the extra factors you found on the internet.
 
so how should i change u(v)dv to u(lambda)d(lambda)

i found a relation
1.png


2.png


so i just replace dv with negative d(lambda)??
and then integrate?
 
\nu = \frac{c}{\lambda}

\frac{d \nu}{d \lambda} = - \frac{c}{\lambda^2}

Therefore

d \nu = - \frac{c}{\lambda^2} d \lambda
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top