Why is the peak frequency of the Cosmic Microwave Background 160 GHz?

AI Thread Summary
The peak frequency of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) is debated, with calculations yielding results around 282 GHz using Wien's Displacement Law. A referenced source cites the peak frequency as 160.4 GHz, indicating a discrepancy in measurements. The discussion highlights the challenges in determining accurate frequencies when dealing with non-perfect black bodies and suggests that definitions of power or intensity can affect results. The use of different constants in calculations can lead to varying peak frequency outcomes. Understanding these nuances is crucial for accurate interpretations of the CMB's characteristics.
Nim
Messages
74
Reaction score
0
What is the peak frequency of the Cosmic Microwave Background?

Using Wien's Displacement (#1) and then converting the wavelength of frequency (#2), I get 282 GHz.

#1. 0.0028977685 / 2.728 = 0.00106223185483871 Meters (1 millimeter)

#2. 299792458 / 0.00106223185483871 = 282228834161.183 Hertz (282 GHz)

This website seems to conclude that it's 160.4 GHz:
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2004/HeatherFriedberg.shtml

Also, if something isn't a perfect black body, is there an easy way to get a more accurate result? Using the surface temperature of the Sun (5785) I get about 500 nanometers, which is green I believe. I imagined I should have gotten a frequency closer to yellow, around 570 nanometers.
 
Last edited:
Space news on Phys.org
I don't think this mismatch has actually something to do with anisotropies or deviations from the blackbody spectrum, but rather with the way that power or intensity are defined or measured per unit wavelength or per unit frequency. This leads to different forms of Wien's law and you have to check the definitions when you read about some "peak frequency". You can read about this here.
 
Last edited:
The hyperphysics website gave 160 GHz as an answer using the linear frequency equation. I just have to use a different constant. Thanks for the help.
 
Last edited:

Thread 'Matter density right after the decoupling'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
View full post »

Thread 'Hubble Constant, Dark Energy and the Expanding Universe'

Why was the Hubble constant assumed to be decreasing and slowing down (decelerating) the expansion rate of the Universe, while at the same time Dark Energy is presumably accelerating the expansion? And to thicken the plot. recent news from NASA indicates that the Hubble constant is now increasing. Can you clarify this enigma? Also., if the Hubble constant eventually decreases, why is there a lower limit to its value?
View full post »

Similar threads

I Some questions about Cosmic Microwave Background radiation
Replies
13
Views
6K
B What's the reason microwave oven frequencies are at 2.45 Ghz?
Replies
30
Views
10K
I How Does a CMB Photon Travel Through Expanding Universe?
Replies
39
Views
5K
I The CMB has a thermal black body spectrum
Replies
18
Views
2K
I Why hasn't the light from the CMB already passed us?
Replies
9
Views
5K
I Why Can We Still Observe the Cosmic Microwave Background?
Replies
7
Views
2K
Why Do Graphs of the Cosmic Microwave Background Show a Peak at 2mm, Not 1mm?
Replies
8
Views
6K
B Questions about the cosmic microwave background radition and its discovery
Replies
4
Views
4K
I What Evidence Exists for the Universe Before the Cosmic Microwave Background?
Replies
20
Views
3K
Why Is the Calculated Temperature of the Universe Different from 3K?
Replies
4
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top