I Inconsistencies in classical physics

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the black body problem and its implications for the conservation of energy in classical physics. Classical mechanics asserts that the total energy of a system remains constant under conservative forces, yet it fails to account for the infinite energy predicted by classical electromagnetic (EM) theory in black body radiation. This discrepancy arises because classical EM theory assumes energy is emitted continuously, leading to unrealistic predictions as frequency increases. To resolve these issues, quantum physics introduced the concept of energy quantization, where EM energy is absorbed or emitted in discrete packets called photons. Ultimately, Quantum Electrodynamics (QED) reconciles classical theory with quantum mechanics, maintaining consistency with energy conservation at low frequencies.
jackferry
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
A question I've had about the black body problem and classical physics in general has to do with the conservation of energy.

One of the first things you can derive in classical mechanics is that for a conservative force the total energy of the system doesn't change. However, one of the typical examples of the failure of classical mechanics is the prediction of infinite energy radiated by a black body radiator. My question is how the classical EM theory predicts the radiation of infinite energy when the EM force is conservative. Is there some assumption that allows for the breaking of the conservation of energy in this case?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The infinite power is more like an expectation than a derived value, and it wouldn't occur with a finite object made up out of a finite number of atoms.

On the other hand, atoms don't work in classical mechanics anyway - the electrons would fall into the nucleus.
 
jackferry said:
A question I've had about the black body problem and classical physics in general has to do with the conservation of energy.

One of the first things you can derive in classical mechanics is that for a conservative force the total energy of the system doesn't change. However, one of the typical examples of the failure of classical mechanics is the prediction of infinite energy radiated by a black body radiator. My question is how the classical EM theory predicts the radiation of infinite energy when the EM force is conservative. Is there some assumption that allows for the breaking of the conservation of energy in this case?
Classical theory is flawed. It does not work in microscopic situations or many situation for that matter. To avoid such a "breaking" of the conservation of energy, quantum physicists created the appropriate theories to tackle the problems. Quantum physics was their solution.
 
  • Like
Likes FactChecker and Delta2
The flaw in the classical EM wave theory is that EM energy is absorbed (or emitted) in a continuous way. This flaw might be hidden when studying other problems regarding EM waves but it shows up in the case of the black body radiation as that emitted power goes to infinity as frequency goes to infinity (while we would expect by typical reasoning and for the main reason of conservation energy that as frequency tends to infinity the emitted power would go to zero).

To correct this flaw, scientists initially suggested that EM energy is absorbed or emitted in discrete packets (photons) but travels as classical EM wave. This leads to some other difficulties as well, in order to fix all the difficulties a new theory emerged , Quantum ElectroDynamics. QED has as "a low frequency limit " the classical EM wave theory because at relatively low frequencies f the energy of the discrete energy packet (photon) is low ##E=hf## where h is plank's constant which is pretty small number, so the energy is absorbed or emitted in very small packets ##hf## could say infinitesimal packets , so it is like it happens in a continuous way, like the classical EM wave theory suggest..
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top