Mathematical transition from classical to quantum

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
2 replies · 3K views
Rade
I have a question--in D. Bohm 1951 text Quantum Theory, on p. 6 he discusses what he calls Wien's Law formula, which contains two parameters hv/kT; where h is Planck's constant and k is Boltzmann's constant. He argues that the Wien formula fits empirical [experimental] data and thus supports theory of quantum mechanics, in contrast to the Rayleigh-Jeans Law, which does not fit empirical data.

Now my question--if we view Wien's Law formula as an approximation for QM as explains equilibrium distribution of electromagnetic radiation in a hollow cavity, and Rayleigh-Jeans Law as an approximation for classical explanation, would it be correct to say that the "mathematical transition" between QM and classical occurs when hv = kT.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Rade said:
I have a question--in D. Bohm 1951 text Quantum Theory, on p. 6 he discusses what he calls Wien's Law formula, which contains two parameters hv/kT; where h is Planck's constant and k is Boltzmann's constant. He argues that the Wien formula fits empirical [experimental] data and thus supports theory of quantum mechanics, in contrast to the Rayleigh-Jeans Law, which does not fit empirical data.

Now my question--if we view Wien's Law formula as an approximation for QM as explains equilibrium distribution of electromagnetic radiation in a hollow cavity, and Rayleigh-Jeans Law as an approximation for classical explanation, would it be correct to say that the "mathematical transition" between QM and classical occurs when hv = kT.

You might want to study the thoughtful paper:
``Classical statistical thermodynamics and EM zero point radiation''
by T.H. Boyer, Physical review, vol 186, number 5 (1969)