Black Body Radiation and Stefan-Boltzmann

James_ wrote:
@All,
The link is to a recreation of Max Planck's experiment on Black Body Radiation. He had a steel bar heated in a blast furnace expecting it to emit black light. If he would've thought to heat one side of the steel bar then he probably would've seen what my video shows.
When talking about Stefan-Boltzmann and emissivity my experiment shows it. The steel plate is conducting heat from the blow torch. The experiment shows that the more energy in a black body the more energy it will emit. And because the heat is being conducted through a Black Body the amount of heat radiated varies. This is why there are different colors being emitted.
I have sent a link of my experiment to a science group and told them to check it out. Black Holes in reality are probably stars that are older than Brown Dwarfs. And this from a repeating a basic experiment. With Max Planck, because he did not see black light being emitted as he expected he changed his work. This is why Planck's Constant was realized. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_constant

My experiment; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wvm4hurlock

And for anyone wondering, soot in the Arctic is most likely emitting black light into the snow and ice. With roads paved using asphalt, same thing, black light is probably being emitted into the ground. This decreases the amount of electromagnetic radiation being refracted/emitted into our atmosphere.
And the experiment with your smartphone, might help everyone to understand somewhat about how light is absorbed and refracted depending on it's wavelength.
Jim

James_ wrote:
@All,
The link is to a recreation of Max Planck's experiment on Black Body Radiation. He had a steel bar heated in a blast furnace expecting it to emit black light. If he would've thought to heat one side of the steel bar then he probably would've seen what my video shows.
When talking about Stefan-Boltzmann and emissivity my experiment shows it. The steel plate is conducting heat from the blow torch. The experiment shows that the more energy in a black body the more energy it will emit. And because the heat is being conducted through a Black Body the amount of heat radiated varies. This is why there are different colors being emitted.
I have sent a link of my experiment to a science group and told them to check it out. Black Holes in reality are probably stars that are older than Brown Dwarfs. And this from a repeating a basic experiment. With Max Planck, because he did not see black light being emitted as he expected he changed his work. This is why Planck's Constant was realized. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_constant

My experiment; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wvm4hurlock

And for anyone wondering, soot in the Arctic is most likely emitting black light into the snow and ice. With roads paved using asphalt, same thing, black light is probably being emitted into the ground. This decreases the amount of electromagnetic radiation being refracted/emitted into our atmosphere.
And the experiment with your smartphone, might help everyone to understand somewhat about how light is absorbed and refracted depending on it's wavelength.
Jim

James_ wrote:
Wade,
Are you really that stupid or are you working at it ? I think you are rude for a reason. And that is because you do not understand science. After all black light is light that is BLACK for the same reason light is any other color we see.
What do you not understand about light ?

Wade, why are you in this forum ? I don't post in here for your entertainment which is what you want. That's kind of sad.

Wake wrote:

James_ wrote:
Wade,
Are you really that stupid or are you working at it ? I think you are rude for a reason. And that is because you do not understand science. After all black light is light that is BLACK for the same reason light is any other color we see.
What do you not understand about light ?

Wade, why are you in this forum ? I don't post in here for your entertainment which is what you want. That's kind of sad.

I asked you what you thought black light was and you answer with the most preposterous answer possible. Black is the absence of light. Black is the absence of color. Across the entire spectrum there is no such thing as "black light".

You haven't a clue what Planck was looking for and you still haven't told us what in hell you think you were accomplishing by heating a steel plate with a torch.

You certainly accomplished one thing - you made it plain that despite my ideas that you were smart enough to learn, you are not. You don't have a the slightest clue about the world around you and you're not bright enough to learn.

James_ wrote:

Wake wrote:

James_ wrote:
Wade,
Are you really that stupid or are you working at it ? I think you are rude for a reason. And that is because you do not understand science. After all black light is light that is BLACK for the same reason light is any other color we see.
What do you not understand about light ?

Wade, why are you in this forum ? I don't post in here for your entertainment which is what you want. That's kind of sad.

I asked you what you thought black light was and you answer with the most preposterous answer possible. Black is the absence of light. Black is the absence of color. Across the entire spectrum there is no such thing as "black light".

You haven't a clue what Planck was looking for and you still haven't told us what in hell you think you were accomplishing by heating a steel plate with a torch.

You certainly accomplished one thing - you made it plain that despite my ideas that you were smart enough to learn, you are not. You don't have a the slightest clue about the world around you and you're not bright enough to learn.

Read your own post. You asked what in the hell I was talking about and then said that all I showed was that I knew how to heat a piece of metal.
I know you can do better so will stay out of your way. I do have other

projects to pursue.

James_ wrote: Read your own post. You asked what in the hell I was talking about and then said that all I showed was that I knew how to heat a piece of metal.

I know you can do better so will stay out of your way. I do have other

projects to pursue.

IBdaMann wrote:

James_ wrote: Read your own post. You asked what in the hell I was talking about and then said that all I showed was that I knew how to heat a piece of metal.

I know you can do better so will stay out of your way. I do have other

projects to pursue.

Did you ever get around to stating "greenhouse effect" in your own words?

Into the Night wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

James_ wrote: Read your own post. You asked what in the hell I was talking about and then said that all I showed was that I knew how to heat a piece of metal.

I know you can do better so will stay out of your way. I do have other

projects to pursue.

Did you ever get around to stating "greenhouse effect" in your own words?

They seem to be arguing what 'black' means.

Wake wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

James_ wrote: Read your own post. You asked what in the hell I was talking about and then said that all I showed was that I knew how to heat a piece of metal.

I know you can do better so will stay out of your way. I do have other

projects to pursue.

Did you ever get around to stating "greenhouse effect" in your own words?

They seem to be arguing what 'black' means.

I'm wondering what he thought he showed when he gave us a video of him heating a disk of what is apparently steel.

James_ wrote:
This might be too advanced for you guys. I mean seriously you guys don't understand what black body radiation is ?

James_ wrote:
This might be too advanced for you guys. I mean seriously you guys don't understand what black body radiation is ?

IBdaMann wrote:

James_ wrote: Read your own post. You asked what in the hell I was talking about and then said that all I showed was that I knew how to heat a piece of metal.

I know you can do better so will stay out of your way. I do have other

projects to pursue.

Did you ever get around to stating "greenhouse effect" in your own words?

Into the Night wrote:

James_ wrote:
This might be too advanced for you guys. I mean seriously you guys don't understand what black body radiation is ?

The combined power of all frequencies of light over a fixed surface area as a result of the temperature of that body above absolute zero.

There is no frequency for 'black' light. There is no such thing.

James_ wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

James_ wrote:
This might be too advanced for you guys. I mean seriously you guys don't understand what black body radiation is ?

The combined power of all frequencies of light over a fixed surface area as a result of the temperature of that body above absolute zero.

There is no frequency for 'black' light. There is no such thing.

And yet black is between brown and blue and this is because the amplitude of the photons are different. But as I mentioned Max Planck heated a piece of steel in a blast furnace. When it glowed orangish red he changed the math he did and came up with his constant. If not for that there would be no Albert Einstein.

Into the Night wrote: I think it's pretty obvious he does not understand what light is or what a spectrum is.

Into the Night wrote:

James_ wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

James_ wrote:
This might be too advanced for you guys. I mean seriously you guys don't understand what black body radiation is ?

The combined power of all frequencies of light over a fixed surface area as a result of the temperature of that body above absolute zero.

There is no frequency for 'black' light. There is no such thing.

And yet black is between brown and blue and this is because the amplitude of the photons are different. But as I mentioned Max Planck heated a piece of steel in a blast furnace. When it glowed orangish red he changed the math he did and came up with his constant. If not for that there would be no Albert Einstein.

There is no frequency for brown either.

Amplitude is not frequency.

Are you saying Albert Einstein came out of a blast furnace? That's incredibly crass.

IBdaMann wrote:

Into the Night wrote: I think it's pretty obvious he does not understand what light is or what a spectrum is.

He's the perfect warmizombie.

At least he knows that zero nanometers ("black" light) falls between 480 nm (blue) and 570 nm (yellow/brown), i.e.

480 nm < 0 nm < 570 nm.

I did not know this previously.


.

James_ wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

James_ wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

James_ wrote:
This might be too advanced for you guys. I mean seriously you guys don't understand what black body radiation is ?

The combined power of all frequencies of light over a fixed surface area as a result of the temperature of that body above absolute zero.

There is no frequency for 'black' light. There is no such thing.

And yet black is between brown and blue and this is because the amplitude of the photons are different. But as I mentioned Max Planck heated a piece of steel in a blast furnace. When it glowed orangish red he changed the math he did and came up with his constant. If not for that there would be no Albert Einstein.

There is no frequency for brown either.

Amplitude is not frequency.

Are you saying Albert Einstein came out of a blast furnace? That's incredibly crass.

You need to be mindful that you have no idea how Max Planck went about his work. Also, the colors being emitted by heating a piece of steel are visible for what reason ?

None of this is meant to be personal except maybe for wade. If any of you try it then what would you say when a piece of steel starts emitting different colors ?

Also you might consider reading Max Planck's autobiography.

James_ wrote:
@All,
Have another project that I've been purduing. As for the experiment, try it for yourselves.

James_ wrote: You need to be mindful that you have no idea how Max Planck went about his work.

James_ wrote: Also, the colors being emitted by heating a piece of steel are visible for what reason ?

James_ wrote: If any of you try it then what would you say when a piece of steel starts emitting different colors ?

James_ wrote: Also you might consider reading Max Planck's autobiography.

James_ wrote:
@All,
I may buy this book to see if it's author included any experiments that Max Planck performed. If you notice in this series that Albert Einstein's work comes after Max Planck's work.
What would be interesting to find out is if steel heated in a furnace at temperature t and is removed then emits light in different wavelengths. This simply means that as the temperature in the furnace is raised and the steel is heated to that temperature that when removed will emit a different wavelength of light. I think this might be the only practical way to see if brown then black light is emitted as the experiment I had done seems to demonstrate.
But this would be for someone that would benefit from such work such as an astrophysicist or an astronomer.

https://www.amazon.com/Planck-Radiation-Elements-Quantum-Physics-ebook/dp/B00OGSQ8VW/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1495717441&sr=8-4&keywords=max+planck

James_ wrote:
I have sent a link to some people who might find this interesting. It seems that you two can only quote what is found online. A historian familiar with Max Planck's actual work might need to be asked if Max Planck calculated a frequency for black light being emitted before he calculated his constant.

James_

Into the Night wrote:

James_ wrote:
I have sent a link to some people who might find this interesting. It seems that you two can only quote what is found online. A historian familiar with Max Planck's actual work might need to be asked if Max Planck calculated a frequency for black light being emitted before he calculated his constant.

James_

Max Planck wasn't that stupid.

Wake wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

James_ wrote:
I have sent a link to some people who might find this interesting. It seems that you two can only quote what is found online. A historian familiar with Max Planck's actual work might need to be asked if Max Planck calculated a frequency for black light being emitted before he calculated his constant.

James_

Max Planck wasn't that stupid.

Did you get this? All we can do is quote what is on-line. But he sent a link to someone.

He doesn't know that "black light" was nothing more than a pseudonym for thermal radiation. Radiation that you could not see.

Into the Night wrote:

Wake wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

James_ wrote:
I have sent a link to some people who might find this interesting. It seems that you two can only quote what is found online. A historian familiar with Max Planck's actual work might need to be asked if Max Planck calculated a frequency for black light being emitted before he calculated his constant.

James_

Max Planck wasn't that stupid.

Did you get this? All we can do is quote what is on-line. But he sent a link to someone.

He doesn't know that "black light" was nothing more than a pseudonym for thermal radiation. Radiation that you could not see.

Nope. There is no such thing as 'black light'. The bulbs marketed as 'black' light bulbs put out violet and soft UV-A light (lower frequencies of the UV-A band). These are often very low power, and won't even produce a tan (which is better obtained with higher frequency UV-A light).

Thermal energy does not radiate. Electromagnetic energy does. Electromagnetic energy is emitted by any substance containing thermal energy above absolute zero. This is known as heating by radiance. It is the only form of heating that can cross a vacuum.

His problem is a familiar one. Worshiping the Holy Link is simply not thinking. It is letting someone else think for you, and claiming their argument as one's own. Such lazy thinking leaves one unable to recognize the fallacies in the argument of another, since they are constantly grasping at other's arguments to fill in their inability to think for themselves.

I know one guy on another board that is so into this he presents nothing but Holy Links for all of his arguments. Any disagreement with his God the Holy Link results in being called a liar and a host of other names.

I despise such lazy thinking.

James_ wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Wake wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

James_ wrote:
I have sent a link to some people who might find this interesting. It seems that you two can only quote what is found online. A historian familiar with Max Planck's actual work might need to be asked if Max Planck calculated a frequency for black light being emitted before he calculated his constant.

James_

Max Planck wasn't that stupid.

Did you get this? All we can do is quote what is on-line. But he sent a link to someone.

He doesn't know that "black light" was nothing more than a pseudonym for thermal radiation. Radiation that you could not see.

Nope. There is no such thing as 'black light'. The bulbs marketed as 'black' light bulbs put out violet and soft UV-A light (lower frequencies of the UV-A band). These are often very low power, and won't even produce a tan (which is better obtained with higher frequency UV-A light).

Thermal energy does not radiate. Electromagnetic energy does. Electromagnetic energy is emitted by any substance containing thermal energy above absolute zero. This is known as heating by radiance. It is the only form of heating that can cross a vacuum.

His problem is a familiar one. Worshiping the Holy Link is simply not thinking. It is letting someone else think for you, and claiming their argument as one's own. Such lazy thinking leaves one unable to recognize the fallacies in the argument of another, since they are constantly grasping at other's arguments to fill in their inability to think for themselves.

I know one guy on another board that is so into this he presents nothing but Holy Links for all of his arguments. Any disagreement with his God the Holy Link results in being called a liar and a host of other names.

I despise such lazy thinking.

Parrot Killer,
So you're only going to allow something that supports your beliefs ? This means this forum is here to promote your propaganda. After all, if I post a link to an experiment that I had tried is my not thinking according to you.
This is a Troll's Paradise.

Into the Night wrote:

Wake wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

James_ wrote:
I have sent a link to some people who might find this interesting. It seems that you two can only quote what is found online. A historian familiar with Max Planck's actual work might need to be asked if Max Planck calculated a frequency for black light being emitted before he calculated his constant.

James_

Max Planck wasn't that stupid.

Did you get this? All we can do is quote what is on-line. But he sent a link to someone.

He doesn't know that "black light" was nothing more than a pseudonym for thermal radiation. Radiation that you could not see.

Nope. There is no such thing as 'black light'. The bulbs marketed as 'black' light bulbs put out violet and soft UV-A light (lower frequencies of the UV-A band). These are often very low power, and won't even produce a tan (which is better obtained with higher frequency UV-A light).

Thermal energy does not radiate. Electromagnetic energy does. Electromagnetic energy is emitted by any substance containing thermal energy above absolute zero. This is known as heating by radiance. It is the only form of heating that can cross a vacuum.

His problem is a familiar one. Worshiping the Holy Link is simply not thinking. It is letting someone else think for you, and claiming their argument as one's own. Such lazy thinking leaves one unable to recognize the fallacies in the argument of another, since they are constantly grasping at other's arguments to fill in their inability to think for themselves.

I know one guy on another board that is so into this he presents nothing but Holy Links for all of his arguments. Any disagreement with his God the Holy Link results in being called a liar and a host of other names.

I despise such lazy thinking.

Wake wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Wake wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

James_ wrote:
I have sent a link to some people who might find this interesting. It seems that you two can only quote what is found online. A historian familiar with Max Planck's actual work might need to be asked if Max Planck calculated a frequency for black light being emitted before he calculated his constant.

James_

Max Planck wasn't that stupid.

Did you get this? All we can do is quote what is on-line. But he sent a link to someone.

He doesn't know that "black light" was nothing more than a pseudonym for thermal radiation. Radiation that you could not see.

Nope. There is no such thing as 'black light'. The bulbs marketed as 'black' light bulbs put out violet and soft UV-A light (lower frequencies of the UV-A band). These are often very low power, and won't even produce a tan (which is better obtained with higher frequency UV-A light).

Thermal energy does not radiate. Electromagnetic energy does. Electromagnetic energy is emitted by any substance containing thermal energy above absolute zero. This is known as heating by radiance. It is the only form of heating that can cross a vacuum.

His problem is a familiar one. Worshiping the Holy Link is simply not thinking. It is letting someone else think for you, and claiming their argument as one's own. Such lazy thinking leaves one unable to recognize the fallacies in the argument of another, since they are constantly grasping at other's arguments to fill in their inability to think for themselves.

I know one guy on another board that is so into this he presents nothing but Holy Links for all of his arguments. Any disagreement with his God the Holy Link results in being called a liar and a host of other names.

I despise such lazy thinking.

What do you mean thermal radiatiation does not radiate? ALL parts of the electromagnetic bands from ultra-low frequency to cosmic waves radiate. Sound is a radiation.

As I stated - Planck referred to "black light" as nothing more than light you couldn't see - thermal radiation.

Into the Night wrote:

Wake wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Wake wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

James_ wrote:
I have sent a link to some people who might find this interesting. It seems that you two can only quote what is found online. A historian familiar with Max Planck's actual work might need to be asked if Max Planck calculated a frequency for black light being emitted before he calculated his constant.

James_

Max Planck wasn't that stupid.

Did you get this? All we can do is quote what is on-line. But he sent a link to someone.

He doesn't know that "black light" was nothing more than a pseudonym for thermal radiation. Radiation that you could not see.

Nope. There is no such thing as 'black light'. The bulbs marketed as 'black' light bulbs put out violet and soft UV-A light (lower frequencies of the UV-A band). These are often very low power, and won't even produce a tan (which is better obtained with higher frequency UV-A light).

Thermal energy does not radiate. Electromagnetic energy does. Electromagnetic energy is emitted by any substance containing thermal energy above absolute zero. This is known as heating by radiance. It is the only form of heating that can cross a vacuum.

His problem is a familiar one. Worshiping the Holy Link is simply not thinking. It is letting someone else think for you, and claiming their argument as one's own. Such lazy thinking leaves one unable to recognize the fallacies in the argument of another, since they are constantly grasping at other's arguments to fill in their inability to think for themselves.

I know one guy on another board that is so into this he presents nothing but Holy Links for all of his arguments. Any disagreement with his God the Holy Link results in being called a liar and a host of other names.

I despise such lazy thinking.

What do you mean thermal radiatiation does not radiate? ALL parts of the electromagnetic bands from ultra-low frequency to cosmic waves radiate. Sound is a radiation.

As I stated - Planck referred to "black light" as nothing more than light you couldn't see - thermal radiation.

Thermal energy is not electromagnetic energy.

Sound will not cross a vacuum. It is not radiation.

Wake wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Wake wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Wake wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

James_ wrote:
I have sent a link to some people who might find this interesting. It seems that you two can only quote what is found online. A historian familiar with Max Planck's actual work might need to be asked if Max Planck calculated a frequency for black light being emitted before he calculated his constant.

James_

Max Planck wasn't that stupid.

Did you get this? All we can do is quote what is on-line. But he sent a link to someone.

He doesn't know that "black light" was nothing more than a pseudonym for thermal radiation. Radiation that you could not see.

Nope. There is no such thing as 'black light'. The bulbs marketed as 'black' light bulbs put out violet and soft UV-A light (lower frequencies of the UV-A band). These are often very low power, and won't even produce a tan (which is better obtained with higher frequency UV-A light).

Thermal energy does not radiate. Electromagnetic energy does. Electromagnetic energy is emitted by any substance containing thermal energy above absolute zero. This is known as heating by radiance. It is the only form of heating that can cross a vacuum.

His problem is a familiar one. Worshiping the Holy Link is simply not thinking. It is letting someone else think for you, and claiming their argument as one's own. Such lazy thinking leaves one unable to recognize the fallacies in the argument of another, since they are constantly grasping at other's arguments to fill in their inability to think for themselves.

I know one guy on another board that is so into this he presents nothing but Holy Links for all of his arguments. Any disagreement with his God the Holy Link results in being called a liar and a host of other names.

I despise such lazy thinking.

What do you mean thermal radiatiation does not radiate? ALL parts of the electromagnetic bands from ultra-low frequency to cosmic waves radiate. Sound is a radiation.

As I stated - Planck referred to "black light" as nothing more than light you couldn't see - thermal radiation.

Thermal energy is not electromagnetic energy.

Sound will not cross a vacuum. It is not radiation.

Aren't you the one that has been quoting Stefan-Boltzmann's law which has the IR frequencies as direct radiation?

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/stefan.html

Wake wrote:

"The thermal energy radiated by a blackbody radiator per second per unit area is proportional to the fourth power of the absolute temperature and is given by"

Wake wrote:
Since this energy will travel through a complete vacuum how are you proposing it not radiate?

Wake wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra_low_frequency "Ultra low frequency (ULF) is the ITU designation for the frequency range of electromagnetic waves between 300 hertz and 3 kilohertz. In magnetosphere science and seismology, alternative definitions are usually given, including ranges from 1 mHz to 100 Hz, 1 mHz to 1 Hz, 10 mHz to 10 Hz."

Wake wrote:
Exactly where are you coming from?

Wake wrote:
Heat doesn't radiate

Wake wrote:
and sound frequencies cannot radiate?

James_ wrote:
Wake,
He is trying to teach everyone how to be metaphysical which is to say spiritual.

p.s., as far as the experiment goes have to believe Max Planck would've liked to have seen it.

Into the Night wrote:
Thermal energy is not electromagnetic energy.

Sound will not cross a vacuum. It is not radiation.

Wake wrote:
And you ask me what "science" you don't understand? This is again rather pointless. If you don't understand what the flux number a Stefan-Boltzmann calculation renders there simply is no talking to you.