Why Use the Average Earth-Sun Distance in Stefan's Law for Energy Conservation?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Stefan's Law in the context of energy conservation, specifically addressing the use of the average Earth-Sun distance in calculations rather than the Earth's radius. Participants are exploring the implications of power emitted by the Sun and received by the Earth.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants question the rationale behind using the average Earth-Sun distance in energy conservation equations, considering the power emitted by the Sun and its reception at the Earth. There are inquiries about the conservation of energy and whether energy is lost during transit. Some participants also discuss the fraction of solar power intercepted by the Earth compared to the total emitted by the Sun.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants seeking clarification on the concepts involved. Some have expressed understanding after engaging with the material, while others continue to explore the implications of the assumptions made regarding energy conservation and the geometry of solar radiation.

Contextual Notes

There are concerns about the assumptions regarding energy loss during the journey from the Sun to the Earth and the fraction of solar power that the Earth actually receives. The discussion highlights the need for clarity on these points, particularly in the context of the textbook example referenced.

sweetreason
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
I am trying to understand an example in my Modern Physics textbook (Example 3.1, page 5 in thishttp://phy240.ahepl.org/Chp3-QT-of-Light-Serway.pdf" or pg 69 using the book numbering)

I don't understand why the average earth-sun distance is being used in the conservation of energy equation instead of the radius of the earth. Isn't the idea that whatever total power is emitted from the sun must equal the total power received at the earth? [I think e_total can be power received, too, right? It just depends on context?] So, to make sure the power at each end of the journey is equal, we multiply the power per unit area (the values we have) by the surface area of each body. But in that case we would want 4pi*(Earth Radius) not 4pi*(Earth-Sun Distance)

I am also a bit worried that no energy is "lost" on the way to the Earth. The book doesn't really talk about that. How do we *know* that energy is conserved in this way?

Thanks!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
To make my second question a bit more precise, how can the total power emitted by the sun equal the total power received at the Earth, since presumably at least half of the power radiated by the Sun goes off in a direction opposite the Earth?
 
sweetreason said:
I don't understand why the average earth-sun distance is being used in the conservation of energy equation instead of the radius of the earth. Isn't the idea that whatever total power is emitted from the sun must equal the total power received at the earth?
Absolutely not! The Earth intercepts a tiny, tiny fraction of the Sun's output. The Earth's cross section to solar radiation is approximately the area of a circle with the radius of the Earth. The Sun's radiation output is pretty much the uniform with respect to direction. By the time the radiation gets to 1 AU it is spread over the surface of a sphere 2 AU in diameter. The fraction of the Sun's output that is received by the Earth is

f = \frac{2\pi r_e^2}{4\pi R_e^2}

where r_e is the radius of the Earth, 6378 km, and R_e is the radius of the Earth's orbit, 149,598,000 kilometers. The value of this f is about 9×10-10. Tiny.

The total power emitted by the Sun is equal to the total power crossing this 2 AU diameter sphere.
 
Okay, I think I understand this now. Thank you!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K