Prove that Planck function increases with temperature

ck99
Messages
56
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Prove that the Planck function increases monotonically with temperature.

Homework Equations



Bv(T) = 2hv3c-2(ehv/kT - 1)-1

The Attempt at a Solution



I first went through this piece-by-piece, but I am not a mathematician so I don't know if this constitutes "proof"!

1) First consider ehv/kT and note that this function will decrease as T increases.

2) This means (ehv/kT - 1) will also decrease.

3) Therefore (ehv/kT - 1)-1 will increase with T.

4) The other elements are independant of T, so the Planck function will increase with T.

I also thought of taking the derivative with respect to T of the Planck function, to see if the gradient ever reached zero to indicate a stationary point. After doing a couple of substitutions, I got

dBv(T)/dT = 2h2v4c-2k-1(e-hv/kT + 1)-1

I'm not sure that is correct, and I think it tells me that gradient gets smaller as T increases. This doesn't help my argument much!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ck99 said:

Homework Statement



Prove that the Planck function increases monotonically with temperature.

Homework Equations



Bv(T) = 2hv3c-2(ehv/kT - 1)-1

The Attempt at a Solution



I first went through this piece-by-piece, but I am not a mathematician so I don't know if this constitutes "proof"!

1) First consider ehv/kT and note that this function will decrease as T increases.

2) This means (ehv/kT - 1) will also decrease.

3) Therefore (ehv/kT - 1)-1 will increase with T.

4) The other elements are independant of T, so the Planck function will increase with T.

The above argument sounds good to me.
I also thought of taking the derivative with respect to T of the Planck function, to see if the gradient ever reached zero to indicate a stationary point. After doing a couple of substitutions, I got

dBv(T)/dT = 2h2v4c-2k-1(e-hv/kT + 1)-1

That's not the correct result for the derivative. Ignoring the constants out front, you have

B = (x-1)-1 where x = ehv/kT.

Try using the chain rule: dB/dT = (dB/dx)##\cdot##(dx/dT)
 
Thanks TSny, I managed to compute the derivative correctly and that can also be put in terms of positive, increasing functions of T so I am sure that is adequate proof.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top