Obtaining the Rayleigh-Jeans formula - what am I doing wrong?

  • Thread starter Thread starter quasar_4
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around deriving the Rayleigh-Jeans formula from the spectral energy density of blackbody radiation, expressed in terms of frequency and wavelength. The original poster attempts to manipulate the given equations but encounters difficulties in achieving the expected result.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the substitution of variables from frequency to wavelength and question the validity of the original equation's units. There is an exploration of Taylor expansion for approximating changes in energy density.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered insights regarding potential issues with unit consistency and the method of substitution. There is an acknowledgment of the complexity involved in transitioning between frequency and wavelength representations of spectral energy density.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the problem may stem from a misunderstanding of the definitions and units of spectral energy density in different contexts. The original poster is working under the constraints of a homework assignment, which may impose specific requirements for the derivation.

quasar_4
Messages
273
Reaction score
0
Obtaining the Rayleigh-Jeans formula - what am I doing wrong??

Homework Statement



Spectral energy density = u(\nu, T) = {\[\displaystyle \,8\,\pi \,h{\nu}^{3}{c}^{-3} \left( {{\rm e}^{{\frac {h\nu}{kT}}}}-1 \right) ^{-1}\]}
where h is Planck's constant and k is Bolzmann's constant.

Using the relation \lambda = \frac{c}{\nu} express the spectral energy density as a function of the wavelength and determine the energy du of a blackbody radiation per unit volume, in a narrow range of wavelength \lambda + d\lambda. Using an expansion of the exponential factor obtain the Rayleigh-Jeans formula,
du = \frac{8 \pi k T}{\lambda^4} d\lambda

Homework Equations



Given some function f(x_1, x_2, ..., x_n),

df = \left(\frac{\partial{f}}{\partial{x_1}}\right) dx_1 + ... + \left(\frac{\partial{f}}{\partial{x_n}}\right) dx_n.

Also, e^{x} \approx 1+x+\frac{x^2}{2!} + ...

The Attempt at a Solution



It seems like it should be easy, but I can't get the equation to come out right. Substituting in lambda, I get

{\[\displaystyle {\it u}\, = \,8\,\pi \,h{\lambda}^{-3} \left( {{\rm e}^{{\frac {hc}{\lambda\,kT}}}}-1 \right) ^{-1}\]}

Then from my equation in part b, we should have that

du = \frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{\lambda}} d\lambda

But I get

\frac{\partial{u}}{\partial{\lambda}} = {\[\displaystyle \,-8\,\pi \,h \left( 3\,\lambda\,kT{{\rm e}^{{\frac {hc}{\lambda\,kT}}}}-3\,\lambda\,kT-hc{{\rm e}^{{\frac {hc}{\lambda\,kT}}}} \right) {\lambda}^{-5} \left( {{\rm e}^{{\frac {hc}{\lambda\,kT}}}}-1 \right) ^{-2}{k}^{-1}{T}^{-1}\]}

Upon using my expansion for the exp. term (expanding around nu = 0, then substituting in nu = c/lambda) the most I can simplify this is to:

du ={\[\displaystyle \,8\,\pi \, \left( -2\,ckT+{\frac {h{c}^{2}}{\lambda}} \right) {\lambda}^{-3}{c}^{-2}\]}d\lambda

so... what am I doing wrong?? It could have something to do with the \lambda + d\lambda (though I just thought that meant I could neglect higher than 2nd order terms in my expansion)...
 
Physics news on Phys.org


A quick check of the units of your original equation, u(\nu,T)=8h\pi\nu^3 c^{-3} \left(e^{\frac{h\nu}{kT} }-1\right)^{-1} suggests that the problem lies there, not with your method.

If you are having doubts about whether or not using du=\frac{\partial u}{\partial\lambda}d\lambda makes sense, another way to look at it is to realize that the spread in energy over the interval \lambda to \lambda+ d\lambda is defined as du=u(\lambda+d\lambda)-u(\lambda). And for infinitesimal d\lambda, a quick Taylor expansion gives u(\lambda+d\lambda)=u(\lambda)+\frac{\partial u}{\partial \lambda}d\lambda, from which the result follows.
 


Interesting. This is an exam problem (from a previous year) at my school, so maybe the question has a typo. I can't see what else one would do to solve for this equation.
 


I must apologize, I was thinking u was just an energy density (units of Joules/m3), not a spectral energy density. Your original equation is just fine. However, you can't simply substitute \nu=\frac{c}{\lambda} into your frequency spectral energy density equation and get a wavelength spectral energy density out of it.

In terms of frequency, the spectral energy density has units of Joule-seconds/m3. While in terms of wavelength, the spectral energy density has units of Joules/m4. The first is defined as an energy density per unit frequency, while the latter is defined as an energy density per unit wavelength. For this reason, u(\lambda,T)d\lambda=u(\nu,T)d\nu. Or, u(\lambda,T)=u(\nu,T)\frac{d\nu}{d\lambda}=u(\nu,T)\times\frac{-c}{\lambda^2}
 


When we substitute d\nu/d\lambda = - c / \lambda^2 in Plancks law of Black body radiation (in frequency), we would get an equation that is same as Plancks law of black body radiation (in wavelength) EXCEPT for a negative sign.

Because it is an ENERGY equation, the negative sign would be omitted.

Is this correct
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
4K