QM- Stefan's constant vs radiation constant

cep
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
QM-- Stefan's constant vs radiation constant

Homework Statement



(a) Using Planck's formula for the energy density ρ(λ,T), prove that the total energy density is given by ρ(T)=aT4 where a = 8π5k4/(15h3c3). (b) Does this agree with the Stefan-Boltzmann law for the total emissive power?

The Attempt at a Solution



I had no problem with the proof in part (a), starting with the equation
ρ(T)dλ = 8πhc/λ5 * dλ/(ehc/λkT-1) and integrating over λ 0→∞.

However, I am confused by the question in part (b). The answers are obviously related. I know that a, the radiation constant, is equal to 4σ/c, and I know you can derive the precise Stefan-Boltzmann equation from Planck's formula. I also suspect the professor is looking for an answer other than "no" or "sort-of." Does anyone know where the difference between that derivation and the one I completed and the one that yields P = σT4 is? What is the utility difference between the radiation constant and Stefan's constant?

Thanks guys!
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Hmm... have a look at the Wikipedia article on Planck's law and see if it suggests anything :wink:
 
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