Stefan-Boltzman Law Proof with Regards to Solar Radiation

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on verifying the solar radiation intensity at the photosphere using the Stefan-Boltzmann Law, assuming the Sun behaves as a blackbody with a temperature of 5777K. Participants express uncertainty about integrating the Stefan-Boltzmann Law and whether it is necessary to derive results from Planck's Law. It is noted that the Stefan-Boltzmann constant encapsulates the integral, suggesting that direct application of the constant may suffice. The complexity of the integral is acknowledged, with references to advanced mathematical functions involved. Ultimately, the consensus leans towards using the Stefan-Boltzmann constant rather than attempting a complex integration.
walterwhite
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



The unit area intensity of radiation from the Sun at the photosphere is 6.33*107 W/m2.

a) Check this value using the calculus of the Stefan-Boltzman Law, assuming the Sun is a blackbody emitter (\epsilon = 1) with a surface temperature of 5777K.

Homework Equations



Stefan-Boltzmann Law:
E_b = \int_0^∞ \! E_{\lambda,b} \, \mathrm{d} \lambda = σT^4
Planck's Law:
E_{\lambda, b} = {\frac{2\pi hc^2}{\lambda^5[e^{(hc/\lambda kT)}-1]}}

where:

c = 2.998*10^{14} \ \mu m \ s^{-1}
h = 6.626 * 10^{-34} \ J \ s
k = 1.381 * 10^{-23} \ J/K

The Attempt at a Solution



I'm not sure how to solve the integral of the Stefan-Boltzmann Law. I know I can substitute E_{\lambda, b} from Planck's law into the Stefan-Boltzmann law, but I have no idea how to integrate it then. Integration by substitution fails here and I have to prove using calculus, that the sun's E_b is equal to 6.33*107 W/m2. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's not an elementary integral, as you've probably guessed. It involves zeta functions and stuff like that. You can reduce it to a dimensionless integral which contains the hard part. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan–Boltzmann_law But I'm not sure you need to do that. Doesn't it just ask you to use the Stefan-Boltzann constant? You can look that up. Do they really mean you should derive it from Planck's Law?
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the reply. It's certainly not. The Stefan-Boltzmann constant comes from the integration, right? No, it doesn't say I need to derive it from Planck's law. However, I don't see how to integrate it without the substitution.
 
walterwhite said:
Thanks for the reply. It's certainly not. The Stefan-Boltzmann constant comes from the integration, right? No, it doesn't say I need to derive it from Planck's law. However, I don't see how to integrate it without the substitution.

I don't think you need to do any integration. The Stefan-Boltzmann constant already includes the integral. Just put numbers in. It's a hard integral. Involves functions that aren't elementary. Stuff beyond just substitution and integration by parts.
 
Alright thanks. I'll give it a shot and see if I can come up with anything.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top