Ultraviolette Catastrophy -Intensity causes melting of objects?

  • Thread starter Thread starter christian0710
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Melting
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the misunderstanding of the ultraviolet catastrophe, clarifying that it is not the intensity of light that causes melting of objects but rather the temperature, which affects molecular kinetic energy. The ultraviolet catastrophe arises from classical electromagnetic theory and the equipartition theorem, which incorrectly predicts infinite intensity as frequency increases. This discrepancy highlights the inadequacy of classical physics in explaining black-body radiation. The conversation emphasizes that the issue lies more with the equipartition theorem than with classical electromagnetic theory itself. Understanding these concepts is crucial for grasping the historical context of the ultraviolet catastrophe.
christian0710
Messages
407
Reaction score
8
Hi,

Is it correctly understood that it's the intensity of light that causes melting or heating of objects and not frequency or vice versa? I'm trying to understand the ultraviolette catastrophe (what the problem was) and according the the equation for intensity (given below) frequency increases exponentially, when intensity increases, so is this the poblem scientists were facing: if a black body radiates light at high intensity it would produce a frequency that was high enough to melt objects and as the intensity increased the frequency would go to inifnity?

I = (2*f*Kbb*T)/c^2
 
Science news on Phys.org
No.

Frequency of light is not what melts objects. Objects melt roughly due to being high enough in temperature such that the kinetic energy of the molecules of the solid can overcome the inter-molecular forces holding the object in its solid state.

The ultraviolet catastrophe has nothing to do with melting objects. It's that the prediction of black body radiation intensity by Rayleigh and Jeans predicts an infinite total intensity due to the intensity frequency relationship diverging as the frequency grows. It was an experimentally known fact that this is obviously wrong.
 
christian0710 said:
Hi,

Is it correctly understood that it's the intensity of light that causes melting or heating of objects and not frequency or vice versa? I'm trying to understand the ultraviolette catastrophe (what the problem was) and according the the equation for intensity (given below) frequency increases exponentially, when intensity increases, so is this the poblem scientists were facing: if a black body radiates light at high intensity it would produce a frequency that was high enough to melt objects and as the intensity increased the frequency would go to inifnity?

I = (2*f*Kbb*T)/c^2
The ultraviolet catastrophe results from classical electromagnetic theory and from the equipartition theorem of the classical kinetic theory (statistical mechanics). According to classical EM theory, the number of vibrational modes (analagous to classical degrees of freedom) of an EM wave in a black-body cavity resonator should be proportional to the frequency^2. According to the equipartition theorem, all modes should have the equal energy. So the rate at which energy is radiated by the black body should increase rapidly with frequency (ie in proportion to the number of vibrational modes which is proportional to the square of the frequency). Since this is not observed, it is apparent that classical physics is not adequate to explain black-body radiation.

My sense is that the ultra-violet catastrophe is more a failure of the equipartition theorem than of classical EM theory.

AM
 
Thread 'A quartet of epi-illumination methods'
Well, it took almost 20 years (!!!), but I finally obtained a set of epi-phase microscope objectives (Zeiss). The principles of epi-phase contrast is nearly identical to transillumination phase contrast, but the phase ring is a 1/8 wave retarder rather than a 1/4 wave retarder (because with epi-illumination, the light passes through the ring twice). This method was popular only for a very short period of time before epi-DIC (differential interference contrast) became widely available. So...
I am currently undertaking a research internship where I am modelling the heating of silicon wafers with a 515 nm femtosecond laser. In order to increase the absorption of the laser into the oxide layer on top of the wafer it was suggested we use gold nanoparticles. I was tasked with modelling the optical properties of a 5nm gold nanoparticle, in particular the absorption cross section, using COMSOL Multiphysics. My model seems to be getting correct values for the absorption coefficient and...
Back
Top