Excellent! A presentation that gives Wien the kudos he deserves rather than using him as a stepping stone to get to Planck & Einstein as quickly as possible. It always humbles me when I think of the hard-core experiments that Kirchhoff, Tyndale, Stefan & Wien carried out with the level of instrumentation they had at their disposal.
To think that Wien came really close to a fully accurate model of the black body curve without quantum physics... he is very underrated for sure and deserves his credit!
"Planck’s Route to the Black Body Radiation Formula and Quantization" by Michael Fowler details Planck's thermodynamic analysis of the entropy of Blackbody Radiation, which motivated his hypothesis to satisfy Wien's Law at high frequencies. Planck's application of Boltzmann's Statistical Mechanics led to his conclusion that the material of the walls emit and absorb radiation in discrete quanta. It's a great read.
A great TH-cam. Really great. Just a little note: Planck didn't talk about energy as distributed as discrete packets; instead, he talked about either emission, or else absorption, of definite discrete amounts. The idea of distribution as discrete packets, for both emission and absorption, was Einstein's.
We were taught this more than 50 years back; what I say is all from memory. Plank started with quanta of hv, and he assumed that finally he will let h approach zero. but he discovered that the results fit experiment if h is kept a finite non-zero value. by keeping h finite, the infamous ultraviolet catastrophe was avoided. this topic was important for the exams and we did study the details very well. that was the golden time in physics, both in experiments and theory.
@janami-dharmam Thanks for your thoughts. My take is that Planck picked either emission or else absorption as quantal. The key is that hν appears in the exponent as well as in the linear factor in the Wein-Paschen distribution. So the limit as h → 0 reduces to 0 = 0; useless. Planck didn't talk about the ultra-violet catastrophe.
Pretty dang sure I've heard the very words degree kelvin degrees kelvin. A degree is just an incriment, a unit, a notch,a tick, a click etc. no reason to get so... It might not SI units of degree kelvin. But then are C and F even degrees anymore? SI deals with multi lingual system of standardizing units!! That means nothing is degrees. Unless it's the unit. Which it's not. Even angles would be in rads or arc minutes etc lol. There is no degrees!!! None
@@SimEon-jt3sr There are degrees C and there are degrees F. There is no such unit as a degree Kelvin. They are only referred to as Kelvin or Kelvin. For all of those who don't think it matters, it does. Nomenclature is important. If you want to be an authority on a subject, you need to know and use the terminology correctly.
Hey nice video but atleast write something about the stefan atleast his name in description, so that your video might show up more from when someone wants to look about stefan.
Thanks for video. Could you help let me know which textbooks are used to derive Wein's scaling law, which includes the expansion of a piston adiabatically under radiation pressure?
@@RationalThinker118 In our conventional text books, it is mentioned that the spectra/light from a star/sun is due to thermal blackbody radiation. But the radiation originates from a nuclear reaction inside the core. Would you kindly say we can call the solar spectrum as a blackbody radiation if it originates from a nuclear reaction?
Very well done. A simulation of blackbody radiation using Maxwell's equations (without the concept of energy quantization): th-cam.com/video/e7xmLySlOUg/w-d-xo.html Both Planck's law and Wien's law are retrieved. The theory we use is inspired by Wien's work. It is not published yet.
Of the clips you made that I have watched I found the information you present useful, but I also have a suggestion if you are really enjoy scientific topics. Learn everything you can about Walter Russell. Anything you can comprehend is vastly better than any of this drivel. Case in point - Black bodies are imaginary mathematical constructs. Allow me to quote Gustav Kirchhoff in 1860: ...the supposition that bodies can be IMAGINED which, for infinitely small thicknesses, completely absorb all incident rays, and neither reflect nor transmit any. I shall call such bodies perfectly black, or, more briefly, black bodies. I can also cite the definition you gave for a 'black body' in physics: A black body or blackbody is AN IDEALIZED PHYSICAL BODY that absorbs all incident electromagnetic radiation, regardless of frequency or angle of incidence. So right there you have the admission that these are imaginary things that are created for no other reason than to validate or lend credibility to the relevance of some formula that follows. What use do such formulas have? Why conjure imaginary things? These guys do this precisely because it would make no sense to suggest there are any hard and fast rules that pertain to or limit the properties or behaviors of any imaginary mental construct! So my question is a reasonable one, and the proper one to ask in this case. 'Publish or die' is a reality for all aspiring intellects, particularly in physics and medicine, but not exclusively, and scientists that choose this rather lazy path just to be included in someone else's historical timeline all share a common characteristic. They often fail to realize their own true potential, evidenced by their failure utilize even their own imaginative capabilities, if all they become famous or notable for is a few worthless formulas. Do you care what any of those relationships he believes in are? Do you believe them to be relevant to anything real in any practical sense? Because if you do I'd like to hear your reasoning. One could also argue that a fear of being incapable of contributing anything better and thus being doomed to some equally imaginary 'roster of the irrelevant' is also a likely factor. The assertion that purely theoretical mathematical modeling can sometimes help us to discover things we would reasonably conclude were previously unknown solely because we acknowledge we are limited by our own perceptive abilities, but it is hard to find a really good example of this methodology bearing anything but rotten fruit. I would offer as the most compelling and most recent example of rotten results as evidence that supports my opinion, but we are all supposed to completely ignore, 'on pain of exile' how obvious the deception that began is 2020 actually was. [wink]
@@RationalThinker118 i was poking fun at the title implying Kirchhoff created thermal radiation. not the math or description: the entire phenomena. like a pioneering inventor heh it's a fine title, i just have an overactive imagination when it comes to words :-) and i quite enjoy your videos, so don't sweat it, this is just some silliness!
Excellent! A presentation that gives Wien the kudos he deserves rather than using him as a stepping stone to get to Planck & Einstein as quickly as possible.
It always humbles me when I think of the hard-core experiments that Kirchhoff, Tyndale, Stefan & Wien carried out with the level of instrumentation they had at their disposal.
To think that Wien came really close to a fully accurate model of the black body curve without quantum physics... he is very underrated for sure and deserves his credit!
Can you make more thermodynamics videos. Cause, I don't think there is enough on the internet. Great job on this one.
"Planck’s Route to the Black Body Radiation Formula and Quantization" by Michael Fowler details Planck's thermodynamic analysis of the entropy of Blackbody Radiation, which motivated his hypothesis to satisfy Wien's Law at high frequencies.
Planck's application of Boltzmann's Statistical Mechanics led to his conclusion that the material of the walls emit and absorb radiation in discrete quanta.
It's a great read.
I can’t find this book anywhere? Amazon doesn’t have it, no one has it!
@@arlenestanton9955 It's a paper, not a book.
Niiiice! I'm leaving a comment for ggl to recommend this fine video.
Thanks!! Hoping for the best 🙏
Josef Stefan was Slovenian by nationality and Austrian by citizenship.
Interesting. I see he was a Carinthian Slovene, born in Austria to Slovene parents.
I like your channel name as well as content 🗣️
Thanks for posting useful information Sir
A great TH-cam. Really great. Just a little note: Planck didn't talk about energy as distributed as discrete packets; instead, he talked about either emission, or else absorption, of definite discrete amounts. The idea of distribution as discrete packets, for both emission and absorption, was Einstein's.
Absolutely makes sense, given that his work here was on black body emission. Glad you enjoyed the video!
We were taught this more than 50 years back; what I say is all from memory. Plank started with quanta of hv, and he assumed that finally he will let h approach zero. but he discovered that the results fit experiment if h is kept a finite non-zero value. by keeping h finite, the infamous ultraviolet catastrophe was avoided. this topic was important for the exams and we did study the details very well. that was the golden time in physics, both in experiments and theory.
@janami-dharmam Thanks for your thoughts. My take is that Planck picked either emission or else absorption as quantal. The key is that hν appears in the exponent as well as in the linear factor in the Wein-Paschen distribution. So the limit as h → 0 reduces to 0 = 0; useless. Planck didn't talk about the ultra-violet catastrophe.
I was just wondering when you'll upload next.
The wait is over! 🙌
Thanks.
The SI unit of temperature is the kelvin. Not degrees Kelvin.
There is no such thing as a degree Kelvin. There are only Kelvin.
Or what?
Pretty dang sure I've heard the very words degree kelvin degrees kelvin. A degree is just an incriment, a unit, a notch,a tick, a click etc. no reason to get so...
It might not SI units of degree kelvin. But then are C and F even degrees anymore? SI deals with multi lingual system of standardizing units!! That means nothing is degrees. Unless it's the unit. Which it's not. Even angles would be in rads or arc minutes etc lol.
There is no degrees!!! None
😑
Doesnt matter
@@SimEon-jt3sr There are degrees C and there are degrees F. There is no such unit as a degree Kelvin. They are only referred to as Kelvin or Kelvin. For all of those who don't think it matters, it does. Nomenclature is important. If you want to be an authority on a subject, you need to know and use the terminology correctly.
Good video
Wow!
Hey nice video but atleast write something about the stefan atleast his name in description, so that your video might show up more from when someone wants to look about stefan.
Actually Stefan-boltzman law in my 11th class physics😅
Thanks for video. Could you help let me know which textbooks are used to derive Wein's scaling law, which includes the expansion of a piston adiabatically under radiation pressure?
I didnt find it in a textbook, but I found a paper that does it and I linked it in the description 😁
@@RationalThinker118 Thanks a lot.
@@RationalThinker118 In our conventional text books, it is mentioned that the spectra/light from a star/sun is due to thermal blackbody radiation. But the radiation originates from a nuclear reaction inside the core. Would you kindly say we can call the solar spectrum as a blackbody radiation if it originates from a nuclear reaction?
Hear is your new subscriber
Very well done.
A simulation of blackbody radiation using Maxwell's equations (without the concept of energy quantization):
th-cam.com/video/e7xmLySlOUg/w-d-xo.html
Both Planck's law and Wien's law are retrieved. The theory we use is inspired by Wien's work. It is not published yet.
6:06 Oh look on the right side... there's Albert Einstein.
🤓🫨👍
Of the clips you made that I have watched I found the information you present useful, but I also have a suggestion if you are really enjoy scientific topics. Learn everything you can about Walter Russell. Anything you can comprehend is vastly better than any of this drivel. Case in point - Black bodies are imaginary mathematical constructs. Allow me to quote Gustav Kirchhoff in 1860: ...the supposition that bodies can be IMAGINED which, for infinitely small thicknesses, completely absorb all incident rays, and neither reflect nor transmit any. I shall call such bodies perfectly black, or, more briefly, black bodies. I can also cite the definition you gave for a 'black body' in physics: A black body or blackbody is AN IDEALIZED PHYSICAL BODY that absorbs all incident electromagnetic radiation, regardless of frequency or angle of incidence. So right there you have the admission that these are imaginary things that are created for no other reason than to validate or lend credibility to the relevance of some formula that follows. What use do such formulas have? Why conjure imaginary things? These guys do this precisely because it would make no sense to suggest there are any hard and fast rules that pertain to or limit the properties or behaviors of any imaginary mental construct! So my question is a reasonable one, and the proper one to ask in this case. 'Publish or die' is a reality for all aspiring intellects, particularly in physics and medicine, but not exclusively, and scientists that choose this rather lazy path just to be included in someone else's historical timeline all share a common characteristic. They often fail to realize their own true potential, evidenced by their failure utilize even their own imaginative capabilities, if all they become famous or notable for is a few worthless formulas. Do you care what any of those relationships he believes in are? Do you believe them to be relevant to anything real in any practical sense? Because if you do I'd like to hear your reasoning. One could also argue that a fear of being incapable of contributing anything better and thus being doomed to some equally imaginary 'roster of the irrelevant' is also a likely factor. The assertion that purely theoretical mathematical modeling can sometimes help us to discover things we would reasonably conclude were previously unknown solely because we acknowledge we are limited by our own perceptive abilities, but it is hard to find a really good example of this methodology bearing anything but rotten fruit. I would offer as the most compelling and most recent example of rotten results as evidence that supports my opinion, but we are all supposed to completely ignore, 'on pain of exile' how obvious the deception that began is 2020 actually was. [wink]
so there was no thermal radiation before Kirchhoff, got it!
:-P if you change the title please respond so i can get rid of this terrible joke!
😂 of course there were many who worked on the topic. I struggled to think of a good title to be honest.
@@RationalThinker118 i was poking fun at the title implying Kirchhoff created thermal radiation. not the math or description: the entire phenomena. like a pioneering inventor heh
it's a fine title, i just have an overactive imagination when it comes to words :-) and i quite enjoy your videos, so don't sweat it, this is just some silliness!
so cool!
@@janami-dharmam is that a "before there was thermal radiation" joke?? hehehehe