Is Planck's Law of Black-Body Accurate?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the understanding of Planck's Law of black-body radiation, particularly focusing on the nature of the radiation emitted and its implications for electron behavior in solids. Participants explore the relationship between emitted radiation, power, and the energy required to remove electrons from atoms.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether the power described by Planck's law relates directly to the energy needed to remove an electron from a solid.
  • It is clarified that Planck's law describes the emission of radiation from a black body at a given temperature and how this power is distributed across frequencies, but does not directly imply electron removal from atoms.
  • Participants emphasize that a single photon of sufficient energy is required to remove an electron, rather than the total power emitted being a determining factor.
  • There is a discussion about the nature of black-body radiation, with some participants asserting that it consists of photons emitted due to the motion of charges in the material, rather than solely through electron removal processes.
  • One participant expresses confusion between photons and photoelectrons, leading to a discussion about the processes of electron excitation and relaxation in relation to black-body radiation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that black-body radiation consists of photons and that the process of electron removal involves specific photon energies. However, there is no consensus on the initial assumptions regarding the relationship between emitted power and electron behavior, leading to some confusion and differing interpretations.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the definitions and implications of terms such as power, energy, photons, and photoelectrons, indicating a need for clarity on these concepts. The discussion reflects varying levels of understanding regarding the mechanisms of black-body radiation and its effects on atomic behavior.

happyparticle
Messages
490
Reaction score
24
TL;DR
If the amount of power ##\beta## is greater than energy to remove electron, does it means that the link between the atom and the electrons is broken?
First of all, Is ##\beta## given by the Planck's law of black-body is the amount of power contained in radiation emitted by a black body?
I'm not sure to fully understand the law above.
Does it means that if amount of power over all the frequencies is greater than the energy needed to remove an electron of a solid then the atom will lose an electron? Since I must convert power to energy I'm not so sure about the statement above.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
happyparticle said:
Does it means that if amount of power over all the frequencies is greater than the energy needed to remove an electron of a solid then the atom will lose an electron?
No. Planck's law is about how much radiation is emitted from a blackbody at a given temperature, along with how the power is split among different frequencies. By itself is says nothing about whether electrons are split from atoms. That requires that a photon of sufficient energy be absorbed by the atom.

happyparticle said:
Since I must convert power to energy I'm not so sure about the statement above.
What are you trying to do?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba and topsquark
happyparticle said:
Does it means that if amount of power over all the frequencies is greater than the energy needed to remove an electron of a solid then the atom will lose an electron?
No. All it takes is a single photon of the right energy (wavelength/frequency). The total power emitted is irrelevant. The power at each wavelength/frequency is only relevant for calculating the probability that it will happen.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark
Sorry for the delay. Thank you for your answers. I now think that I don't really understand what exactly is the radiation emitted from a black body. I thought it was the photons.
 
happyparticle said:
I now think that I don't really understand what exactly is the radiation emitted from a black body. I thought it was the photons.
The issue is not that black body radiation is made of something besides photons. The issue is that you are incorrectly assuming that the only process in an object that can possibly involve photons is electrons being removed from atoms.

In fact there are lots of ways for objects made of lots of atoms to emit (and absorb) photons that leave atoms perfectly intact.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50
happyparticle said:
Sorry for the delay. Thank you for your answers. I now think that I don't really understand what exactly is the radiation emitted from a black body. I thought it was the photons.
It is photons. The photons are predominantly emitted by the 'jiggling' of the charges making up the material, not from electrons being removed from or added to atoms.
 
Is it possible that I messed up photon and photoelectrons. It seems like I described this phenomenon where electrons are emitted when hit by electromagnetic radiation. In this case can the electromagnetic radiation be emitted by a black body?
 
happyparticle said:
Is it possible that I messed up photon and photoelectrons. It seems like I described this phenomenon where electrons are emitted when hit by electromagnetic radiation. In this case can the electromagnetic radiation be emitted by a black body?
A black body is a theoretical construct that models ideal thermal radiation. What you're talking about is electron excitation/relaxation, which is the basis for substances' emission/absorption spectrum.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
9K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
1K