Proving Expanding Black Body Problem: A Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter zdream8
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on proving the behavior of an expanding black body, specifically how its temperature changes when its dimensions are doubled. When the volume expands, the number of photons remains constant, but their wavelengths double, leading to a decrease in energy density to one-sixteenth of the original. Consequently, the temperature of the black body is halved, aligning with the fourth power Stefan-Boltzmann Law. Participants seek clarity on manipulating the energy density equation and confirming that the black body remains classified as such despite the expansion. The mathematical representation of these concepts is essential for a semi-formal proof of the phenomenon.
zdream8
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I was wondering how to prove the problem about an expanding black body.
There is a black body at a given temperature. All lengths are expanded by a factor of 2. Then it should still be a black body, but at a lower temperature.
I understand why this should happen, but I was wondering if anyone could show me how the proof works.
I found the equation for energy density

I(\lambda,T) =\frac{2 hc^2}{\lambda^5}\frac{1}{ e^{\frac{hc}{\lambda kT}}-1}
.
(sorry, I just copied it and that looks bad, but it's easy to find online)

but I wasn't really sure what to do with it. The wavelengths are obviously going to increase and the photon density is going to go down by appropriate factors...I'm just not sure how it all fits together.
Thanks. :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Space news on Phys.org
When one says, expand, does one infer work. Only if a hot body expands and exerts a force over a distance, i.e. does work, would it cool.

If the blackbody simply expands, without doing work, it remains at temperature, but the heat flux per unit surface area decreases, i.e. the number of photons per unit area decreases.
 
This was brought up in context of the expanding universe, I forgot to mention.
And like I said, I realize that it makes sense, I just need help manipulating the equation and mathematically representing the concepts to do a semi-formal proof.
Thanks. :)
 
zdream8 said:
This was brought up in context of the expanding universe, I forgot to mention.

Just to get a bit more definite, since it about an expanding universe, suppose we picture something concrete like a volume V of space with a lot of photons in it, with blackbody temp T

so now suppose distances double

the new volume is 8V

and it contains the same number of photons as before but their wavelengths have all doubled so they represent only half as much energy

so the new energy density is 1/16 of the old.

that means the temperature is now T/2 (use the energy density form of the fourthpower Stefan Boltzmann Law)

IS THIS WHAT YOU HAD IN MIND? because if so it is very easy to write down the equations that go along with it
 
Yes, that's basically what I'm talking about, thanks. But in writing the final equation, then the energy density would equal (1/16)*the original equation? And the T in the final equation would be (T/2)? (Is that correct?) Would that be all the changes? This is where I get confused...because then shouldn't the lambdas be 2*lambda? But this makes the end factor different. Could you show me how the equations work? Sorry, it seems really simple, but I'm stuck on something.
And also, based on it being in the same form, is it implied that it remains a black body? I understand physically that nothing in expansion alone would change any proportions, so it would remain a black body, but I don't know if that's "good enough" with the math.
Thanks again.
 
Last edited:
Abstract The Event Horizon Telescope (EHT) has significantly advanced our ability to study black holes, achieving unprecedented spatial resolution and revealing horizon-scale structures. Notably, these observations feature a distinctive dark shadow—primarily arising from faint jet emissions—surrounded by a bright photon ring. Anticipated upgrades of the EHT promise substantial improvements in dynamic range, enabling deeper exploration of low-background regions, particularly the inner shadow...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
Title: Can something exist without a cause? If the universe has a cause, what caused that cause? Post Content: Many theories suggest that everything must have a cause, but if that's true, then what caused the first cause? Does something need a cause to exist, or is it possible for existence to be uncaused? I’m exploring this from both a scientific and philosophical perspective and would love to hear insights from physics, cosmology, and philosophy. Are there any theories that explain this?
Back
Top