1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Planck's Radiation Law?

  1. Sep 22, 2007 #1
    1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data

    The dependence on wavelength [tex] \lambda [/tex] of the intensity [tex]I(\lambda)d\lambda[/tex] of the radiation emitted by a body which is in thermal equilibrium with its surroundings at temerature T is given by:

    [tex]I(\lambda)d\lambda = \frac{2 \pi h c^{2}/\lambda^5}{e^{hc/kT\lambda}-1}d\lambda[/tex]

    in the interval of wavelength between [tex] \lambda [/tex] and [tex] \lambda+d\lambda [/tex]. In this expression, h is Planck's constant, k is Boltzmann's constant, and c is the velocity of light.

    Sketch and clearly label on one figure the dependences of [tex]I(\lambda)d\lambda[/tex] on [tex] \lambda [/tex] for three different temperatures [tex] T_{1} < T_{2} < T_{3} [/tex].

    Simplify the above expression in the limit of (i) short wavelength ([tex]\lambda\rightarrow0[/tex]) and (ii) long wavelength ([tex]\lambda\rightarrow\infty[/tex]).

    (The binomial expansion [tex]e^{x} = 1+x+x^{2}/2+...[/tex] may be useful.)

    2. Relevant equations

    All given in the problem i think.

    3. The attempt at a solution

    I found Planck's Radiation Law was almost exactly the same as this i searched for it on wikipedia for more information:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck's_law

    On that page is a graph which i thought was showing what the first part of the question is asking but i don't understand what the question means when it says "clearly label on one figure the dependences of [tex]I(\lambda)d\lambda[/tex] on [tex] \lambda [/tex]"?

    For the second part i tried to make the formula look simpler first:

    [tex]\frac{A}{\lambda^{5}(e^{B/\lambda} - 1)}[/tex]

    I think as [tex]\lambda\rightarrow0[/tex], [tex]e^{B/\lambda} - 1[/tex] can be simplified to [tex]e^{B/\lambda}[/tex] because the latter expression will be very large giving:

    [tex]\frac{A}{\lambda^{5}e^{B/\lambda}}[/tex]

    I'm having some trouble posting the rest of my thread but i thought for the last part as lambda goes to infinity the expression would simplify to A/lambda^5 but i'm not sure how to work these out for definite i think this is probably wrong.
     
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2007
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 22, 2007 #2

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    For large [itex]\lambda[/itex], you can expand [itex]e^{B/ \lambda } [/itex] to first order, using the Taylor series provided to you. You will get a different answer than [itex]A/ \lambda ^5 [/itex]. Your answer for the short wavelength limit is correct.

    As for "labeling", I believe that is asking you to make it clear which curve represents which temperature (T1,T2,T3).
     
  4. Sep 22, 2007 #3
    Thanks for the help this is what i've got so far:

    [tex]\lambda^{5}(e^{B/\lambda} - 1) = \lambda^{5}(1 + \frac{B}{\lambda} + \frac{B^2}{2 \lambda^2} + \frac{B^3}{6 \lambda^3}... -1)[/tex]

    [tex]\frac{A}{\lambda^{5}(\frac{B}{\lambda} + \frac{B^2}{2 \lambda^2} + \frac{B^3}{6 \lambda^3}... )}[/tex]

    [tex]\frac{A}{B \lambda^4 + 1/2 B^2 \lambda^3 + 1/6 B^3 \lambda^2 + 1/24 B^4 \lambda + 1/120 B^5}[/tex]

    I think all the other terms in the expansion would tend to 0 so they can be ignored, if this is right it's as far as i can get though i can't see how to simplify any further although this makes it look longer and maybe even more complicated?
     
  5. Sep 22, 2007 #4

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Actually, it's better than that!

    [itex]B/ \lambda <<1 \implies B^2 \lambda^3 << B \lambda ^4 [/itex], etc. So feel free to throw away all terms after the first one.
     
  6. Sep 23, 2007 #5
    Thanks for the help again :)

    I was wondering i can see the difference between this:

    [tex]I(\lambda)d\lambda = \frac{2 \pi h c^{2}/\lambda^5}{e^{hc/kT\lambda}-1}d\lambda[/tex]

    and Planck's radiation formula:

    [tex]I(\lambda)= \frac{2 h c^{2}/\lambda^5}{e^{hc/kT\lambda}-1}[/tex]

    is [tex]d\lambda[/tex] and [tex]\pi[/tex]. How do you transform one into the other? What does it mean to write it like the question did with [tex]d\lambda[/tex] either side or more specifically what does the [tex]d\lambda[/tex] mean in that context?

    If you integrated both sides to get rid of the [tex]d\lambda[/tex] s would the [tex]\pi[/tex] dissapear? I really should try and integrate it myself rather than just asking but it looks complicated :S i'll give it a shot though.
     
  7. Sep 23, 2007 #6

    dextercioby

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    There' a [itex] \pi [/itex] difference. But only because you forgot to put it in the second formula. The difference between the 2 formulas is important only when you try to change the variable from wavelength to frequency [itex] \nu [/itex] or angular frequency [itex] \omega [/itex]. In that case, the formula involving differentials should be used.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Planck's Radiation Law?
  1. Planck's law (Replies: 11)

  2. Planck Black-Body Law (Replies: 1)

Loading...