- 1,047
- 793
Is the explanation at the end of the video correct?
The discussion revolves around the phenomenon observed when an infrared laser is directed at a radiometer vane, specifically addressing the mechanisms behind the glowing spot produced on the metal surface. Participants explore various explanations, including thermal effects and the role of convection, conduction, and radiation.
Participants express differing views on the mechanisms at play, with no consensus reached regarding the primary cause of the glowing effect. Multiple competing explanations are presented, and the discussion remains unresolved.
Participants note limitations in understanding the thermal dynamics involved, including assumptions about conduction, convection, and radiation that have not been fully explored or quantified.
Sorry, yes the question should have included more detail...Vanadium 50 said:@Swamp Thing , it's not like you are new here. "Here's a video, 'splain it to me" is a bad thread start. You've been here long enough to know what you get out of PF is proportional to what you put into PF.
He says the laser is heating the metal to incandescence. He also says that convection is the reason that it doesn't work in air.hmmm27 said:Conduction requires cross-section ; those vanes look pretty thin. I'm not sure why "radiation doesn't matter" : where does he think the glow is coming from ?
Unless you've perfect conduction, it's going to glow. Whether that glow extends far enough into the visible spectrum to see is another thing.Swamp Thing said:If radiation mattered, then it wouldn't have glowed even in vacuum.
I think P needs to be the power absorbed and so will be incident power minus reflected power.hmmm27 said:If we can ignore conduction and make enough other gross simplifications and assumptions to make a few eyes twitch here and there, we can stick the output power and dot size of the laser pretty much directly into the Stefan Boltzmann law to get the temperature.
Oh, definitely, but that would require knowing the composition of the leaf (which I imagine is carbon-deposited aluminum, but really have no clue).tech99 said:I think P needs to be the power absorbed and so will be incident power minus reflected power.