Manipulating λmax * T formula to relate T1 to ∆T

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the relationship between the initial temperature T1 and the change in temperature ∆T based on the emitted radiation's wavelength from a black body radiator. The key equation used is λmax * T = 2.898 x 10^-3 m * K, with the relationship λ2 = 0.9λ1 indicating a decrease in wavelength as temperature changes. Participants clarify that T1 cannot be directly equated to λ1 and emphasize the need to manipulate the equations correctly to eliminate T2. The solution involves careful algebraic manipulation to derive the correct relationship, leading to the conclusion that the answer is not immediately obvious and requires thorough analysis. The discussion highlights the complexity of the problem and the importance of precise calculations in thermodynamic relationships.
Eli Hurley
Messages
1
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


In an experiment to study a black body radiator, the intensity of emitted radiation is measured as a function of the wavelength of the radiation. At a particular temperature T1 the wavelength of the highest intensity radiation is determined to be λ1. When the temperature is changed by ∆T the wavelength of the highest intensity radiation changes to λ2, with λ2 = 0.9λ1. The relationship between T1 and ∆T is:

A. not possible to determine because of the ultra-violet catastrophe.
B. T1 = 9∆T Kelvin
C. T1 = 10/9∆T Kelvin
D. T1 = 0.111∆T Kelvin
E. None of the above

Homework Equations


λmax * T = 2.898 10^-3 m * K

The Attempt at a Solution


Since (2.898 10^-3 m * K) is a constant, I immediately discount that in my workings (I can see in the possible answers that it's also not needed).

We know that:

T1 = λ1 and λ2 = 0.9 * λ1

We also know that:

T1 * ∆T = λ2 therefore T1 * ∆T = 0.9 * λ1
^(is this a correct representation?)
I don't think it is, which is why I've changed it to:

T1 * (T2-T1) = λ2 therefore T1 * (T2-T1) = 0.9 * λ1

Upon expansion:

T21 - T11 = λ2 therefore T21 -T11 = 0.9 * λ1

I've been trying to keep my calculations limited to the variables in the possible answers but can't help ending up with T2 (or get rid of the λ1). Is there any other way to manipulate ∆T? My calcs are getting bigger than Ben Hurr and I'm beginning to doubt the legitimacy of the manipulations...

I'm sure this question has to be easier than the lengths I've gone to, if someone can please point out where I've taken a wrong turn that would be greatly appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Eli Hurley said:

Homework Statement


In an experiment to study a black body radiator, the intensity of emitted radiation is measured as a function of the wavelength of the radiation. At a particular temperature T1 the wavelength of the highest intensity radiation is determined to be λ1. When the temperature is changed by ∆T the wavelength of the highest intensity radiation changes to λ2, with λ2 = 0.9λ1. The relationship between T1 and ∆T is:

A. not possible to determine because of the ultra-violet catastrophe.
B. T1 = 9∆T Kelvin
C. T1 = 10/9∆T Kelvin
D. T1 = 0.111∆T Kelvin
E. None of the above

Homework Equations


λmax * T = 2.898 10^-3 m * K

The Attempt at a Solution


Since (2.898 10^-3 m * K) is a constant, I immediately discount that in my workings (I can see in the possible answers that it's also not needed).
We know that:
T1 = λ1 ...
Oh no, we don't know that. We can't equate a wavelength with a temperature.
You have λ2 = 0.9λ1
T2 = T1 + ∆T
T1 λ1 = T2 λ2.
Work carefully with these , eliminate T2 and you will get the right answer.
 
  • Like
Likes Eli Hurley
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top