1
$\begingroup$

Just a quick question relating to the thermal Blackbody temperature of a celestial object. In the c.g.s regime of astrophysics, is it more 'sophisticated' to quote the thermal Blackbody temperature in units of Kelvin ($\mathrm{K}$) or in units of $\mathrm{keV}$? That is to say to use $k_{B}T_{\mathrm{bb}}$ and convert to an energy?

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

I'm not entirely sure what you mean, but the (Planck's) formula for blackbody radiation is given by

$$S_{\lambda} = \frac{8 \pi h c}{\lambda^5} \frac{1}{e^{hc/\lambda kT} - 1}$$

where $h$ is in $\mathrm{J \cdot s}$, $c$ in $\mathrm{m/s}$, $\lambda$ in $\mathrm{m}$, $k$ in $\mathrm{J/K}$ and $T$ in $\mathrm{K}$. So, the temperature is just in kelvin, not in energy. This formula, with these units, gives $S$ in $\mathrm{W/m^2/m}$, which describes the amount of energy per temperature and wavelength. There is no need to convert a given temperature to energy.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Did you mean to write $\mathrm{W/ m^2/m}$? $\endgroup$ – Sir Cumference Oct 25 '16 at 21:25

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.