Quantum physics-rayleigh jeans/wien's law

  • Thread starter Thread starter dado1307
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Law Quantum
dado1307
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Show that the Rayleigh-Jeans radiation law is not consistent with Wien displacement law,
λmax T=constant, or vmax is proportional to T.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The displacement law states that at any temperature T the black body spectrum reaches its peak at a wavelength given by the displacement law.
If you happen to plot the Rayleigh-Jeans formula, you'll find there is no maximum. The shorter the wavelength, the higher the spectral power. This is known as the "ultra-violet catastrophe" and, in the search of a "cure", Planck came up with his famous proposal.
 
Thank you very much...:))))
That makes perfect sense...
 
Gordianus said:
The displacement law states that at any temperature T the black body spectrum reaches its peak at a wavelength given by the displacement law.
If you happen to plot the Rayleigh-Jeans formula, you'll find there is no maximum. The shorter the wavelength, the higher the spectral power. This is known as the "ultra-violet catastrophe" and, in the search of a "cure", Planck came up with his famous proposal.

Actually, Planck developed his work as a refinement of Wien's law and was not attempting to solve the Ultra-violet catastrophe problem. In fact I believe his work (which included what is now know as Planck's constant) before or right around the same time as Rayleight-Jeans proposal.
 
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