Popular Boards

Ranjan Das | Journal of Chemical Education | (2015)

Abstract

Interrelations between the wavelength- and frequency-dependent formulations of Wien's displacement laws have been derived from the corresponding energy distribution functions of Planck's blackbody radiation law. Mathematical aspects of the transformation of functions have been illustrated using a simple function. The importance of including the infinitesimal of the independent variable of the distribution function has been highlighted. Some erroneous statements relating to Wien's displacement law in certain textbooks have been addressed. An iterative method has been described to find the roots of equations containing exponentials and obtain the values of λmax and νmax, the points at which Planck's energy distribution functions are maximized. From this, the reason behind the apparent anomaly of the product λmax × νmax not being equal to the velocity of light has been established.

Tags

Sample Definition And Size

The paper by Ranjan Das (2015) presents a theoretical analysis of the interrelations between wavelength- and frequency-dependent formulations of Wien’s displacement law. It does not involve empirical data or a sample; rather, it is a theoretical/mathematical study.

Study Type

The study is a theoretical derivation and mathematical analysis, focusing on transformations between formulations of Wien’s displacement law and addressing textbook errors, including an iterative method to find λ_max and ν_max.

Conflicts Of Interest

No conflicts of interest are declared in the available metadata (no statement found in the abstract or reference metadata).

Results Summary

Key findings include: derivation of interrelations between wavelength- and frequency-dependent forms of Wien’s displacement law; demonstration of the importance of including the infinitesimal of the independent variable in distribution functions; correction of erroneous textbook statements; description of an iterative method to compute λ_max and ν_max; and explanation of why the product λ_max × ν_max does not equal the speed of light.

Referenced In

Season 17, Episode 8: The “Red Hot” Debate, Betelgeuse and Rigel

Hey StarTalkians! Season 17, Episode 8 was a “Thing you thought you knew” edition, where Neil and Chuck sat down to chat about a few interesting facts. The highlight of the episode – at least for me – was Neil’s science-inspired rant about people saying things are “red hot.”

Thing You Thought You Knew – Red Hot, Blue Hot - StarTalk Radio 

(The discussion starts at 13:45)

He’s right… Kind of. As you’d expect, the physics is right. But when we move over to the real world, the reason we say “red hot” is baked right into the equations.

Black Body Radiation and the Temperature of Stars – Neil’s Point

This whole discussion comes down to what physicists call “black body radiation.” This is the light that something emits as a result of its temperature.

As Neil explains, when this emitted energy gets to the visible part of the spectrum, red is the lowest energy – coolest – colour of light we can see. If the temperature increases, it goes through orange, yellow, green and (theoretically) all the way to blue.

With some simplifying assumptions, physicists use Wien’s displacement law (Wavelength- and Frequency-Dependent Formulations of Wien’s Displacement Law) to describe this:

λ T = (a constant)

Here, λ is the wavelength with the peak output, and T is the corresponding temperature. This is all equal to a constant (2.898 × 10^(−3) meters-Kelvin), so we can do a little trick. Let’s say we’re looking at two stars in Orion: Rigel (blue) and Betelgeuse (red). Both of them fulfill Wien’s law, so we can write:

 λ(Rigel) T(Rigel) = (a constant) = λ(Betelgeuse) T(Betelgeuse)

But we know Rigel is blue (short wavelength) and Betelgeuse is red (long wavelength). So since λ(Rigel) <  λ(Betelgeuse), the only way this could all work is if T(Rigel) > T(Betelgeuse). And it’s true! (Colour evolution of Betelgeuse and Antares over two millennia, derived from historical records, as a new constraint on mass and age )

This is Neil’s point.

Why We Still Say “Red Hot”

You give off black body radiation too. But you’re so cold compared to a star that the wavelength is way too high for our visual range. The same goes for an unheated bit of iron.

But if it gets really hot, it will actually enter the visible range for the first time, glowing red.

Wein’s law shows that for something to go “blue hot,” it would have to reach about 7,000 degrees Celsius. No metal could get this hot without melting (Melting Point of Common Metals, Alloys, & Other Materials | AMERICAN ELEMENTS ®). So it makes sense we would never say that.  

2