Black Bodies and Planck Explained

[@izzyy319]

All this time I've been hating physics but I watched this video and was blown away. It all makes sense now. Thanks so much!!

[@bipolatelly9806]

Isabel Curtis Then you will LOVE the Thunderbolts Project. THE science channel on utoob!

[@shupesmerga4694]

IMO, the lack of context in the way of educating the kids makes these subjects difficult

[@juliusraben3526]

Sad that your school physics teachers couldnt do what this video did...... (it definitley made maths easier for me xD)

[@PhysicsHigh]

Glad it helped.

[@sauroman1]

Math is also boring. But make physics visual and easily understandable to imagination and it gets whole new meaning.

[@yoinkling]

Oh okay, I don't have to be confused about "why" because "why" isn't explained by Plank! what a relief

[@reindeerchai1286]

The stair and slope example was brilliant! Thanks : D

[@shupesmerga4694]

Great explanation, subjects are easily understood when they don't depart from the context, it keeps the chain of thought connected and your attention continuous. Story-telling at it's finest.

[@xapk]

Hi, working my way through some early universe cosmology and need to understand some basic concepts more clearly.....so this is perfect! Thanks for your generous time!

[@danielsteinbrecher8339]

Thank you so much for keeping this topic to the basics so one can understand the central principal! Not one German video I saw did it as well as you did.

[@almirbravin1]

Its is the best explanation I've found at the level of high school , congratulations teacher.

[@friendlyman4729]

Honestly you are a saviour to my atar

[@sarahc.167]

Thank you so much for this. So grateful to all the teachers who give their time to make amazing videos like this

[@Danny-hj2qg]

(2:28) Correction, you're getting the smaller wavelengths in the blue/violet region of the visible spectrum, not the "frequencies" like you said.

[@clarrrisaj8520]

I spent so long trying to understand this topic but this video is so well explained. Thank you !!

[@viharakumarasinghe8884]

As always your videos are amazing. Thank you so much for creating them. This is perfectly clear, simple and very easy to understand.

[@abdelrahmanabdelraouf6201]

Thank you truly for the great video. Taking a modern physics course this semester and the TA explained it poorly, appreciate the help!

[@gearhead1302]

I was having a hard time fully understanding this and now I get it! Thanks.

[@shreyakalkundri137]

It was too good... I really understood everything.... Thank you so much

[@Banana-qg1jp]

This suddenly makes so much more sense!! Thank you soooooo soooo soooo much!!!!!

[@PhysicsHigh]

you are welcome - please share with your friends

[@aretib1026]

first year studying physics at uni, really helpfull video!

[@PhysicsHigh]

Glad it was helpful

[@kugaththeplaguefather6332]

4:05 may i ask why does it go down? the red thing like raises up from the start but then goes back down

[@vispi1944]

Very good and clear presentation.

[@sheizm888]

Wow, I’m actually learning and fascinated this time around. Thank you

[@PhysicsHigh]

Glad you liked it.

[@willzhou4229]

Very easy to understand presentation on an abstract topic

[@anthroexile]

Brilliant!!!! Thank you very much!

[@vinosburhan2519]

Thannnk yoouuuuuu 🌸

[@seisukeota273]

I watched the video and enjoyed it.

[@urwahsohail1813]

Oh my god. I have watched a lot of videos, and This is just incredible.

[@saveearth9816]

Thank you very much.... I watched many videos to understand... (why we say U. V catastrophe) I thought that because of harmful EM radiotion (ionizing radiation) from U. V & and shorter frequencies.... BUT NOW I REALIZED BECAUSE IT BREAKS THE EXPECTATION OF THE CLASSICAL PHYSICS

[@michelleluulam472]

sir you are great

[@PhysicsHigh]

thank you - glad it helped

[@angelisvegan5826]

You have no idea how thankful I am

[@amanbhanse5645]

great video!!.....this video helps me to understand the planck's law.....other videos on youtube are just waste of time,,,,,,....

[@douglasstrother6584]

"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.

[@Anonymous-by5jp]

Thanks. I’ll look it up

[@Anonymous-by5jp]

You’ve done a great job of shedding light on a complicated subject. Thanks 😊

[@douglasstrother6584]

@@Anonymous-by5jp You bet! It's very accessible, written at the Junior/Senior Undergraduate level.

[@hariharansankaran9012]

Thank you

[@douglasstrother6584]

@@hariharansankaran9012 "Theoretical Concepts in Physics: An Alternative View of Theoretical Reasoning in Physics" by Malcolm S. Longair contains a more details.

[@nagahumanbeingzooofparticl8836]

very well explained.. thank you.

[@savannahparrish7261]

I needed this thank you 🙏!

[@davidwilkie9551]

Black-body e-Pi anti node singularity vanishing-into-no-thing zero-infinity axial-tangential sync-duration orthogonality. Inside-outside holographic time-timing positioning by i-reflection containment.

[@JaykeSapalaran-iq3qs]

Great video information 👍❤thank you for sharing your knowledge and experience 🇵🇭🫡

[@brianbycroft6090]

Am I missing something? As E = hf, more strictly speaking energy is only quantised for a particular emr frequency. As far as I'm aware, f is continuous??

[@chrisraccoon1726]

great and precise explanation! very greatful

[@sauroman1]

Where to find that spectrum calculator?

[@kartikamarjeet2082]

Thank you very much! Beautifully explained.

[@capitão_paçoca]

Finally understood what a n body is. Thanks!

[@plamenpenchev262]

Very nice channel. But I have two remarks. First, Plank fitted the experimental data with his formula and then tried to explain it with thermodynamics and the necessary E = hf. Second: why everybody starts with Plank? 30 - 40 years ago spectroscopists supposed that the energy levels are discrete -- spectra are discrete. Also, the term black body is very confusing for a layman. BB is in thermodynamics equilibrium: it emits the same amount of energy that absorbs. Practically BB is not a black thing. As an IR spectroscopist (chemist, not physicist) I always wondered if the colour of BB is black as it is usually illustrated (by you too).

[@kiranchannayanamath3230]

Very elegant explanation.

[@CarinaPrimaBallerina]

Excellent! Thank you

[@wlo23ex81]

At 6:41, it says that black bodies absorb radiation right? This has been boggling on my mind for a bit now, but what about a lightbulb filament that doesn't necessarily have to absorb electromagnetic radiation, and is counted for as a black body. The thing is, that it also reflects light, so how can this be a black body?

[@PhysicsHigh]

A filament MODELS a black body. But it isn’t perfect. About the closest thing to a black body is a star. A true black body does not reflect any light.

[@climatebell]

I just found this video and liked it very much for its crisp educational explanation and added it to my Some Relevant Science Videos playlist so others will find it. Planck's equation is the key equation I used to create the GHG Lab calculator which performs precise and accurate computations for how much the Earth's System is heated from a change in GHGs. This is novel work to help head-off future needless mitigation activities. The link is on my channel if you are curious.

[@boxfox2945]

How does this relate with radiated particle. Something radiated is slightly warm. But doesn't emediatelly show burns. Till later. & doesn't glow.

[@PrinceKumar-wx1sk]

awesome... sir, thank you :)

[@DonatoColangelo]

Very nice explanation Sir. I just started reading (for something like the 5th time) “Quantum” by M. Kumar, a fantastic book on many respects, and the first chapter is about the black body radiation problem, Wien’s solution and inherent problem and of course Plank mathematical solution. I was looking for Plank’s formula and I am so happy to have found it in the video. Now I’d like to understand how he got to that specific equation, which is quite complex. Oh, by the way, I subscribed to the channel! Cheers.

[@PhysicsHigh]

Thanks for your feedback 😉

[@vijgenboom2843]

Great! Thank you.❤️

[@zitscx886]

14:10 There should no pie in the numerator. Just pointing it out!

[@mandeepkatnori3892]

loved it... seriously!!! got the point I was looking for ... thank you !!! 👌

[@anzatzi]

It is not clear why introducing a quantized constant solves the 'catastrophe'. Thats the video I want to see! Thank you.

[@sebastiendubois8326]

why the curve come down at ultraviolet ??

[@akshinbarathi8914]

sir is it like the number of photons become constant after the max inetsity like in photoelectric effect?

[@oneworld823]

Thank you so much. Great explanation. Wonderful effort. Keep posting. Regards.

[@philmiller99]

I finally understand this. Thanks.

[@tiagoromero1777]

How did he came up with that? I think he figured out that energy was quantized and to get the value he just tried smaller and smaller numbers until the equation matched up with the experimental data... Then just multiplies that constant by the frequency and there it is, such a simple but beautfil approach to solve the problem

[@carlosalexandreFAT]

The association of the main numbers in mathematics reflect numerical sequences that correspond to the dimensions of the Earth, the Moon, and the Sun, in the unit of measurement in meters, which is 1" (second) / 299,792,458 m/s (speed of light in a vacuum). Planck's constant. Planck’s constant: 6.63 × 10-34 m2 kg. Circumference of the Moon: 10,916. Gold equation: 1,618 ɸ (((6.63 ^ (10,916 x 10^-4 )) x 1.618 x (10^3)= 12,756.82 Earth’s equatorial diameter: 12,756 km. Planck's temperature: 1.41679 x 10^32 Kelvin. Newton’s law of gravitation: G = 6.67 x 10^-11 N.m^2/kg^2. Speed of Sound: 340.29 m/s (1.41679 ^ 6.67) x 340.29 - 1 = 3,474.81 Moon's diameter:: 3,474 km. Frequencies of the Planets of the Solar System: • Mercury: 141.27 Hz; • Venus: 221.23 Hz; • Earth: 7.83 Hz; • Mars: 144.72 Hz; • Jupiter: 183.58 Hz; • Saturn: 147.85 Hz; • Uranus: 432 Hz; • Neptune: 211.44 Hz; • Planck constant: 6.63 × 10^-34 m2 kg. • ((141,27 + 221,23 + 7,83 + 144,72 +183,58 + 147,85 + 432 + 211,44) ^ 6,63) x (10^-17) = 10.916,17 Moon's circumference: 10,916 km. Orion: The Connection between Heaven and Earth eBook Kindle

[@isaiahmills714]

wow cool these videos are amazing

[@lesnerchai2186]

Great video sir. Your great explanation is what I need . Thank you.

[@n.1822]

thank you so much this is amazing

[@PhysicsHigh]

you are welcome - please share and spread the word

[@sosscs]

What kind of function is that graph? it's so weird I cannot understand it. How come there's 2 points in the y axis? usually, when you pick a value from the x axis it give only one value from the y axis, but how come the y axis is giving 2 values?

[@shaden8322]

How did planck tho explain it using one law?

[@chriselvidge6891]

Instead of referring to the wavelengths involved in the UV "catastrophe" as "smaller" wavelengths - I recommend using "shorter" wavelengths.

[@Set_Get]

thank you for these videos. i wonder what interactive tool/software you used for displaying Wien's law. regards

[@PhysicsHigh]

You’re welcome. All the tools I use is listed on my website but I used a pHET animation as well for this video.

[@Set_Get]

@@PhysicsHigh thanks Paul.

[@anthonyyee7481]

The incandescent light bulb is a Blackbody...how about the fluorescent light bulb is it also a Blackbidy ..if not then what is the reason? Tq !

[@PhysicsHigh]

Fluorescent light is not a black body. The light is a result of electrons jumping energy levels (quantum effect) Whereas black body radiation is different.

[@bizarrehuh8076]

thank you!

[@philoso377]

Nice video and presentation. Ty and Jean gave us a curve fitting solution is mathematics but science. On the other hand Planck offer a final curve fitting solution is also mathematics but science. The catastrophe came out of our ignorance, selective learning and inability of connecting dots so to speak. Essentially, at the time the instrument’s sensor was sealed inside a glass container and we all know that glass attenuates infrared and ultraviolet that masked off real response, in the end we saw a distorted view on page 8:30+. That means we still don’t know the real characteristics is until we have found a new material but glass to preserve the real information in the signal, light. We have PhD everywhere today but they offer us D and not Ph. Without philosophy science is soulless.

[@Thrna_1]

What simulator did you use!?

[@PhysicsHigh]

I use an IWB software called Inspire.

[@Thrna_1]

@@PhysicsHigh like clockwork! Thx

[@rieske2000]

Thanks a million. Crystal clear explanation.

[@Gr8VKS]

Great explanation. Thanks :)

[@earlspencer7863]

Why does the curve go down at high frequencies? Even if it's quantized it shouldn't prevent high frequency radiation from being created.

[@danielpursey8471]

Exactly the question I keep asking but can't find a explanation.

[@mathisdude9222]

@@danielpursey8471 My amateur understanding is that, as the energy required to emit electromagnetic radiation gets really high (like at the UV end of the spectrum), the probability of actually emitting such a high energy photon gets really low. There's plenty of energy, but the odds are just better that EMR with longer wavelengths gets emitted, and that's what happens.

[@danielpursey8471]

@@mathisdude9222 Thank you

[@a.tigerjr.6132]

So are we saying that the Planck constant was utilized because we simply don't have a perfect radiator to experiment with to prove the classic model?

[@tishamcmeekin9182]

I heard that Einstein filled the hole of understanding the formula. Can atoms be seen? How are they measured? I like Buckminster Fullers General Systems Theory model, wherein the metaphysical must be considered. Physics cannot explain metaphysics because by its nature it is finite or limited. All good for material universe, but what about that which we don't see physically? Even the full spectrum of color (as well as phenomena)... Thank you for sharing your insights.

[@saifrahaman8974]

Thanks sir

[@coppercrusader6791]

im in graduate school haha the HIGH school physics explained makes me feel so dumb

[@mahathirmoon5010]

cause you are

[@tetestoes5188]

@@mahathirmoon5010 mean

[@mahathirmoon5010]

@@tetestoes5188 that's okay

[@tetestoes5188]

@@mahathirmoon5010 nah what if that person is sensitive

[@123bluestorm1]

@@mahathirmoon5010 dude wtf. Stop insulting people especially when u saved videos of UNDERSTANDING SLOPE and INTERPRETING DOT PRODUCT. The former even a middle schooler can understand, the latter a decent high schooler would get. If this guy is in grad school he’s prob much more smarter than you, a person who needs help understanding middle school maths.

[@isaiahmills714]

hey if the filliment hot even hotter than white it would turn blue of violet right?

[@PhysicsHigh]

+Isaiah Mills it would turn bluish not pure blue. That is because there is higher intensity of blue violet but the other colours are still there.

[@louisvanhunsel1932]

something you need to hear things from another teacher and it all falls into place, thank you!!!!

[@huntergirl7275]

I think the white line you drew on the ultraviolet catastrophe screen should show exponential growth, not exponential decay, though...

[@LawGrowtopia]

THANK YOU

[@PrinceKumar-wx1sk]

but I'd have loved if u would have explained the derivation of the formula Planck used to predic nature of the wave

[@VeronicaConcepcion-i2f]

this helped me very much. i couldn't understand it in class that much but thanks to this i understood it!

[@MichaelVLang]

This must have seemed very odd to Planck and others then...it is such a strange concept...I enjoyed your explanation, thank you!

[@bipolatelly9806]

yes... we are electrical in nature.... (like EVERYTHING)

[@samanthapaul650]

i didnt think Id be one of those people but this was posted on birthday lolol

[@isaiahmills714]

what about a ceramic plate?

[@PhysicsHigh]

+Isaiah Mills I'm not sure what you mean?

[@Hold_the_Front_777]

What if we want to understand the formula? Doesn't it kind of seem like an ad-hoc explanation to try to explain why our perception of physics didn't meet experimental observable predictions, so we basically had to reify the atom, and invoke quanta packets of energy to math it out.

[@Buddha-Einstein]

Purely INTUITIVELY SPEAKING, HOW DOES QUANTIZATION show intensity going down at higher frequencies? Put the math aside, what stops energy from taking next quanta of hf?

[@visasaarinen6051]

I must be stupid but I still don't understand the concept of quantization. If the Energy obeys the equations E=hf sure there is a Planck's Constant there but if one graphs energy as a function of frequency E(f) it's a smooth curve, a line with a slope of Planck's Constant to be exact. So how come people talk about stairs and steps? If the frequency distribution is continuous so is the energy distribution. What am I missing? a confused teacher asking for help.

[@PhysicsHigh]

You’re not stupid. Great question. Haven’t time now but will respond in the next few days.

[@PhysicsHigh]

We ned to clarify what quantisation means and what it doesn't mean. You are correct, the graph you state is smooth since it displays the energy of photoelectrons for a range of frequencies. So yes, that energy graph is continuous. But thats not what the quantisation is about. What Planck determined, that for any given frequency , the energy of a quanta of EMR is a whole number multiple of the frequency by Planck's constant. ie E = nhf. So the smallest amount of energy will be where n = 1 so E = hf. It was Einstein who was able to explain the PE effect by saying that only photoelectron can be released by one photon whose energy is E =hf. so if you get get a RANGE of frequencies then you will get a RANGE of energy Now this would suggest a continuous range of energies. But we now know that emission of EMR is a result of quantum effects ie electron transitions between energy levels, which results in very specific frequency emissions and thus discrete energy emissions Does that clarify?

[@tietovisa585]

@@PhysicsHigh Thank you for your explanation! I know it's been two months since you answered my question but back then I wasn't able to put into words my follow-up question. I hope I can do it now. Your explanation clarified most of the things I was unsure about but there is still one thing I need to ensure. When it comes to a black body radiation the radiation is temperature dependent. And that's why I made a conclusion the radiation is due to the thermal motion (vibration) of the atoms (because atoms consist of positive protons and negative electrons that emits EMF when in acceleration). But that radiation wouldn't be quantized because the atoms themselves could have arbitrary vibration speed/acceleration? So the previous conclusion must be wrong. Does it mean that even though the black body radiation happens due to the temperature of the object it's not because of the atoms vibrating in the substance itself and those vibrations cause the emission of EMF but because vibration energy results electron transitions between energy levels and those transitions are quantized and because EMF is a result of those transitions that's why the EMF radiation is quantized as well? I hope this wasn't too confusing. Thank you in advance!

[@gordonfiala2336]

I'm going to assume BlackBody Radiation pertains to the influences, radical influences, of having negative energy When, namely, energy surges, and discharges repeatedly(in waves).

[@gordonfiala2336]

Let's see in the next 15 minutes.

[@gordonfiala2336]

The sun is distinctly yellow. And so... In fact, if u stop are risk your eyesight and Focus on it instead of the blaring light, it is plainly yellow. It's so dangerous to look at XD. But it appears like a lusterous dull object.

[@gordonfiala2336]

Hmn. "A perfect redistributer."

[@gordonfiala2336]

What's a double rainbow? Not proof of a pattern that the Graph omits? Of course it is.

[@gordonfiala2336]

I'll hit like. But.... I can look at air molecules in flight from 1-17 feet, Can zoom with my eyes, and have looked at the sun's surface. So... Thanks for the input, I like hearing common culture, and byE.

[@Curiousgeorge78398]

Excellent explanation thank you.

[@leightonjulye]

very applicable to glowing sphere

[@vinitachaudhary472]

Can coal be an example of black body?

[@neilparker2310]

At 13:54 (just to make it precise) "Now we don't really need to understand that formula". If that's the case the rest is absolutely and totally meaningless! If we don't understand the formula , then we cannot possibly show how quantisation solved the so-called "UV catastrophe" !

[@PhysicsHigh]

Agree. If I did the video again I’d probably express it a little differently. The pint still remains: a detailed explanation of the formula wasn’t needed for the curriculum at the time.

[@neilparker2310]

@@PhysicsHigh At least something along the lines of following: hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mod7.html#c2

[@mohamadelchami9010]

Bravo!

[@debbiehariette6335]

Thank you :0)

[@ashutoshsuman9473]

Planck's Constan h = 6.626 × 10^-34 Js It's 10 raised to the power -34. And the analogy About Black Body was Awesome. It helped me better understand the concept about black Body. Thanks

[@aaronweatherson4379]

...yep - sometimes recognizing reality is an act of desperation...

[@goddess_ofchaos]

Me: searches the whole internet for an explanation about the formula Planck came up with Video: this is Planck's formula Me: FINALLY Video: but you don't have to understand it, it's not important!

[@PhysicsHigh]

Sorry. Made for high school physics and the formula is beyond that scope. Plan to do an addendum to elaborate

[@shenzshorts3352]

@@PhysicsHigh Sir plz could you explain the graph i can’t get it...9:11 why their prediction was wrong,why the graph is curved and not a straight line with increasing intensity and decreasing wavelength...why the intensity suddenly falls down....? I’ll be very thankful...

[@goddess_ofchaos]

@@PhysicsHigh ah that's no problem I truly appreciate your work here! It would be nice if you have the time to explain the formula, I'll look forward to it. But of course the essential information is already in the video. Keep going!!

[@miraklTutorial]

You know what, I had been calling Eistein a thief who took Planck's work to call it photoelectric effect. Now when Planck himself says "an act of desperation" i don't understand this, when he got every thing to explain the quantum nature of light. You know what my problem is that i unable to differentiate between Planck's quanta and Einstein photon.

[@PhysicsHigh]

Planck tweaked their maths to fit the data and was basically making a mathematical statement about energy being quantised. He did not understand the significance of it initially. It was Einstein who did.

[@harishkumar-yo4pj]

sir you are greatt