Understanding Wien's Law: Power Radiated & Wavelength

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter PsychonautQQ
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Law
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around Wien's Law, specifically addressing the relationship between power radiated by blackbodies and wavelength, as well as the implications of temperature on this relationship. Participants explore the theoretical underpinnings of Wien's Law, including references to Planck's Law and the quantization of electromagnetic radiation.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why maximum power is not radiated at the shortest wavelength, referencing the equation E = hc/λ and seeking clarification on the temperature dependence.
  • Another participant explains that the derivation of Wien's Law stems from Planck's Law and discusses the quantization of the electromagnetic field, detailing the counting of modes in a frequency interval.
  • A subsequent reply challenges the accuracy of the derivation presented, suggesting it resembles Debye or Drude models rather than Planck's original work, which focused on quantizing material harmonic oscillators.
  • One participant clarifies that the energy in the context of Wien's Law pertains to the distribution of energy across blackbody radiation rather than the energy of individual photons, which explains the discrepancy in applying E = hc/λ directly.
  • Another participant acknowledges the hand-waving nature of the derivation provided and mentions the complexity of Planck's original derivation, referencing Bose-Einstein statistics.
  • A later reply notes that Wien's Law predates Planck's work and that Planck's quantization allowed for the calculation of constants in Wien's Law.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the derivation of Wien's Law and its relationship to Planck's Law, indicating that there is no consensus on the specifics of the derivation or the historical context of these theories.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight limitations in the derivations presented, including potential inaccuracies in attributing certain derivations to Planck versus other physicists, and the complexity of the energy distribution in blackbody radiation.

PsychonautQQ
Messages
781
Reaction score
10
My physics textbook is talking about blackbodies and has a graph showing Power radiated as a function or wavelength on the y-axis and wavelength on the x axis. The slope grows to it's maximum value exponentially and then decays exponentially. They clarify that the peak of the graph is the wavelength that provides the maximum power radiated, and go on to talk about Wien's law.

My question is why is the most power not radiated at the shortest wavelength? E = hc/λ? Why is it dependent on the temperature?
 
Science news on Phys.org
This comes from Planck's Law, i.e., the quantization of the electromagnetic field.

The shortcut derivation from semiclassical arguments, following mostly Planck's original derivation, goes as follows. First you start counting the number of modes in a frequency interval \mathrm{d} \omega of electromagnetic waves. To this end think of a cubic volume L^3. Only waves with wave numbers \vec{k} \in \pi/L \mathbb{N}^3 "fit" into the volume. The corresponding modes are given by
\vec{E} \propto \sin(k_1 x) \sin(k_2 y) \sin(k_3 z),
fullfilling the boundary condition that \vec{E}=0 at the boundary of the volume. The number of modes in a frequency interval of width \mathrm{d} \omega around \omega=c k thus is
\mathrm{d} N=\mathrm{d}^3 \vec{k} 2 \frac{L^3}{\pi^3} = \mathrm{d} k k^2 4 \pi 2 \frac{L^3}{(2 \pi)^3}.
The factor 2 comes from the two polarization states of the em. waves. In the last step we have written the volume elment in spherical coordinates and integrated out the angles. We have to multiply by 1/8 because only the octand with positive wave numbers has to be taken. Written in terms of frequency we finally get
\mathrm{d} N=\mathrm{d} \omega 8 \pi \frac{L^3}{(2 \pi c)^3}.
To get the energy spectrum we need the average energy in each mode at given temperature. According to classical physics each mode represents an oscillator, and its mean energy is thus k T according to the equipartition law. This leads, however, to a wrong energy spectrum, particularly a divergent total energy in the electromagnetic field (Rayleigh-Jeans UV catastrophe), and only then your "intuitive" idea that the highest frequencies give the most energy in the radiation field.

Now, according to Planck's and Einstein's hypothesis on the quantization of radiation energy, each oscillator can take only discrete energy levels, E_n=n \hbar \omega with n \in \mathbb{N}_0. That means that the mean energy is
\frac{\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} n \hbar \omega \exp(-n \hbar \omega/(k T))}{\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \exp(-n \hbar \omega/(k T))}=\frac{\hbar \omega}{\exp(\hbar \omega/(kT))-1}.
The energy spectrum is thus given by
\mathrm{d} \epsilon=\frac{8 \pi \hbar \omega^3}{(2 \pi c)^3 [\exp(\hbar \omega/(kT))-1]} \mathrm{d} \omega,
where \epsilon=E/V=E/L^3 denotes the energy density. This can be rewritten in terms of the wavelength, and finding the value for the maximum of the corresponding spectral function leads to Wien's displacement law: The wavelength of maximal emission fulfills the rule
\lambda_{\text{max}} T=\text{const}.
 
This comes from Planck's Law, i.e., the quantization of the electromagnetic field.

The shortcut derivation from semiclassical arguments, following mostly Planck's original derivation, goes as follows. First you start counting the number of modes in a frequency interval dω of electromagnetic waves.
Could you give a reference? I do not think what you wrote is Planck's original derivation. This is more like Debye or Drude if I remember correctly. Planck quantized material harmonic oscillators, not EM modes.
 
E in E=hc/λ you mentioned, seems to be the energy of a single photon with wavelength λ. What you're dealing with in Wien's law is the energy distribution for whole blackbody radiation - the number of photon is never distributed uniformly over the wavelength in blackbody radiation.

That explains why you cannot apply E=hc/λ to get the wrong Wien's law that would state λmax=0.
 
That's true. The derivation I've given, is a pretty hand-waving way using a photon picture (free em. field as a set of harmonic oscillators; I'm not sure who did this first, perhaps Einstein?) Plancks derivation is pretty involved. In a way it's using Bose-Einstein statistics but of course that's not very explicit. I only know the German Annalen article, which can be downloaded for free here:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/andp.19013090310/abstract
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
19K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 152 ·
6
Replies
152
Views
11K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K