Authors: Pierre-Marie Robitaille
In this work, the equation which properly governs cavity radiation is addressed once again, while presenting a generalized form. A contrast is made between the approach recently taken (P. M. Robitaille. On the equation which governs cavity radiation. Progr. Phys., 2014, v. 10, no. 2, 126–127) and a course of action adopted earlier by Max Planck. The two approaches give dramatically differing conclusions, highlighting that the derivation of a relationship can have far reaching consequences. In Planck's case, all cavities contain black radiation. In Robitaille's case, only cavities permitted to temporarily fall out of thermal equilibrium, or which have been subjected to the action of a perfect absorber, contain black radiation. Arbitrary cavities do not emit as blackbodies. A proper evaluation of this equation reveals that cavity radiation is absolutely dependent on the nature of the enclosure and its contents. Recent results demonstrating super-Planckian thermal emission from hyperbolic metamaterials in the near field and emission enhancements in the far field are briefly examined. Such findings highlight that cavity radiation is absolutely dependent on the nature of the cavity and its walls. As previously stated, the constants of Planck and Boltzmann can no longer be viewed as universal.
Comments: 6 Pages. First Published in: Progress in Physics, 2014, v. 10(3), 157-162. (revised December 26, 2014 and December 29, 2014)
Download: PDF
[v1] 2014-05-01 09:31:18
[v2] 2014-12-26 16:29:33
[v3] 2014-12-31 12:03:07
Unique-IP document downloads: 381 times
Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.
Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.