Talk:Black-body radiation

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Black-body radiation article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1: 3 months

Physics Mid‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Astronomy Mid‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Index

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Earth's energy budget#Outgoing energy|radiation]] The anchor (#Outgoing energy) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.
[[Earth's energy budget#Outgoing energy|Earth's infrared glow]] The anchor (#Outgoing energy) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Application to people

The math in this section is wrong and the result 1000 W is way off. This needs to be fixed by an expert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.130.189.238 (talk) 17:10, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is nonsense. The heat loss is 100 W. 1000 W is radiation, but needs absorbtion too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.30.183.44 (talk) 19:54, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake at the end of Further … subsection, just before Equations

The formula E = σT^4 is incorrect, if E is “radiant heat”. First, it is an equation, not a formula.

The correct equation is j* = σT^4 where j* is the energy flux, i.e., the power per unit area. Indeed T is absolute temperature and the Stefan-Boltzmann constant has the correct dimensions.

David B. Benson (talk) 21:02, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What does "its" refer to under first graph?

Danred99 (talk) 03:36, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is it or is it not true

Is it or is it not true that all macroscopic objects emit BB radiation? I think this article is confused, and I think it's likely because the editors are confused. The lead defines it in a way that means it doesn't exist. There are no perfect thermal equilibria, nor do any perfect black bodies exist. The concept that seems to be missing here is "idealization". Not approximation, not estimate; idealization. All macroscopic bodies emit EMR. Full stop. Of course, we can jump into the weeds (into the can of worms) and ask what is meant by "body" (or object)? (general answer would be something like an arbitrary closed surface), but let's not do that. My understanding of BB radiation is that it is the emission which would be emitted by a black body at the same temperature as the object in question. The REAL object will have additional features in its emission spectrum (both additive and subtractive). This means it is an "as if". It probably would be useful to state that there are no objects that are able to absorb all possibly incident EMR radiation. (Black holes aside). Finally, I want to stress that the editors aren't wrong, but they don't handle the entire universe of contexts in which BB radiation is a useful concept. In fact, their formal definition is a disconnect with the real-world (and the real utility of the concept).71.30.95.172 (talk) 06:00, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Calling Sun and almost every other object in Universe (beside reflecting objects) a "Black Body", is a typical confusion of modern Science... It should be called Body Thermal Radiation ... 79.98.159.114 (talk) 15:31, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discrepancy in Wien's displacement law ?

There are two examples for 293K in section Wien's displacement law, which do not match each other... When interpolating Planck's law Bν(T) maximum for T=293K, I get maximum at ν=17.225THz, which has wavelength of 17.404μm, which is the second case in that article section... What is then the 9.9μm maximum in first case in that article section? For Λ=c/f the two values 17THz and 9.9μm do not match each other... 79.98.159.114 (talk) 15:08, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a mistake, see Wien's displacement law#Maxima differ according to parameterization for details. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 17:10, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, when the Planck's formula result is divided by μm per 1 Hz, and then integrated per unit wavelength, then the peak is near 9.9μm ... Maybe it is not sufficiently explained in the article... 79.98.159.114 (talk) 09:59, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]