jc456
Diamond Member
- Dec 18, 2013
- 138,931
- 29,007
- 2,180
ok, it's there now. Perhaps you could have merely asked for it instead of wasting your time as you say. there are ways to communicate that can accommodate the concerns.he did quote the passage in his post!Says right there in the equation ian...i thought you were the brightest guy in the room....surprising that the smartest guy in the room would miss such a fundamental statement of the equations..and then base everything after on a terribly flawed understanding of the fundamentals...Here ian....
This equation represents a radiator...radiating into nothing...radiating according to its temperature...where might you find nothing...no background other than a vacuum ian?
This equation represents a radiator radiating into a background with some temperature....in order for the radiator to be radiating...(P=something other than 0), the background must be cooler than the radiator...the presence of a background with a temperature suggests somewhere other than a vacuum
This is something that I have been trying to point out to you for a long time ian, and you just don't seem to be able to grasp it...these aren't just numbers and symbols...they are sentences, structured to say something...structured to describe a physical reality...the words could be written out in english, or german, or yiddish, but the symbolism of math is more efficient...but it doesn't change the fact that they are statements written in a language describing a physical reality... one describes a radiator...in a vacuum, radiating according to its temperature...the other describes a radiator, not in a vacuum, radiating according to the difference between its own temperature and the background it is radiating into...you can't see that because you can't grasp that it is something other than math....you only see the equations and not the physical reality they are describing...which is precisely why you find that you had no idea that the radiator you love to describe radiating according to its temperature is sitting all by its lonesome in a vacuum...you are so busy being the smartest guy in the room that you have missed things that us guys who have to put an effort into thinking see pretty clearly. You apparently are under the impression that you know so much that thinking is no longer necessary.
It is a sad commentary on your intellect that you would have to have "special" mention made of a vacuum....the guys who wrote this figured that if you were interested, you would have already taken the time to learn to speak the language....where, other than a vacuum might you be able to put your radiator so that it remains unaffected by any background temperature?
??????
There you go again! You make a foolish assumption and surround it with semantics, then convince yourself that it must be true.
.
Sorry ian..but you are wrong. But here you go...perhaps the physics department at Perdue is credible enough to move you to enlighten yourself somewhat. It is difficult to find a source that explicitly states that the first version of the SB law depicts a radiator radiating into a vacuum...they wrongly assume that anyone reading the material already knows this...clearly everyone reading the material doesn't.
Stefan.doc - Physics (is a doc file from Perdue university which you must download to read)
Okay I scanned over the document. It is a boilerplate description of how to do a blackbody experiment. I only saw vacuum mentioned once, something like 'radiation emitted into the vacuum ', which may have been a quote from an old text. Vacuums had no relevance to the experiment but I did notice that their means of measurement was by using a thermophile detector, which they described in some detail.
You are as bad as Old Rocks, sending me on wild goose chases that have no point, and in the end contradict your position.
Next time quote the passage, or at least identify where it can be found. What a fucking waste of time.
"Experimentally, σ was measured with increasing precision from the 1890’s (σ=5.45◊10-8Wm-2K-4) to the 1930’s (σ=5.737±0.017◊10-8Wm-2K-4). Thus knowing σ and the surface area of any object (assumed to be a blackbody), the power emitted into a vacuum can be calculated.
In this experiment, you will repeat Stefan’s measurements using computer-assisted data acquisition techniques and you will obtain an estimate for the Stefan-Boltzmann constant σ."
That was added afterwards in an edit. As can be seen from my quote.