In the Classroom

edited by
Resources for Student Assessment John Alexander
University of Cincinnati
Cincinnati, OH 45221
The Planck Radiation Law:
Exercises Using the Cosmic Background Radiation Data
S. Bluestone
Department of Chemistry, California State University, Fresno, Fresno, CA 93740; sydb@csufresno.edu

Physical chemistry students usually encounter Max
Planck’s blackbody radiation law early in their study of quan-
tum mechanics. To enhance students’ interest in the historic
Planck radiation law and to celebrate its centenary anniver-
sary, I present three exercises based on the cosmic microwave
background radiation (CBR) data, the relic from the big bang
primeval explosion (1–3). After the radiation laws of Planck
and Wien are introduced, students are asked to (i) find the
temperature of the Planck and Wien distribution laws by
fitting the experimental CBR data to both radiation expres-
sions, (ii) verify Wien’s displacement law, and (iii) compute
the Stefan–Boltzmann constant. Subsequently, students are
asked to justify whether they can statistically choose the Planck
distribution law rather than the Wien formula to represent
the data.
Students benefit from and are motivated by exercises
involving experimental data. The principal advantage of the
exercises described below lies not so much in the novelty of
the ideas (4, 5) as in furnishing a coherent set of spreadsheet
computations that utilize data from the most significant and
recent experiments in astrophysics and serve as an entry into
the origins of quantum mechanics.
After the primordial big bang event, the universe was
opaque to the passage of radiation owing to the scattering of
photons by electrons. Expansion of the universe produced a
cooling, and after some 300,000 years the temperature had
decreased to about 3000 K (1, p 100). At this temperature
electrons became attached to protons and the photons were
able to fly freely through space. As the expansion of the uni-
verse continued, the spectrum of the radiation was redshifted,
much as the wavelength of a light wave drawn on a balloon
is increased as the balloon is blown up. Equivalently, the tem-
perature of the blackbody radiation spectrum decreased. At
the present time the temperature is postulated to have fallen
to a single-digit value and the blackbody radiation spectrum is
preserved. The CBR spectrum free from atmospheric effects
was obtained in 1989 from the Cosmic Background Explorer
(COBE, pronounced “Co Bee”) satellite experiment. It con-
firmed that all of space was filled with isotropic microwave
radiation characterized by a single temperature (6, 7 ).
The Radiation Laws
The derivation of Planck’s radiation law is given in a
number of sources, including several physical chemistry text-
books (8–13). The Planck energy density function is
ρ(ν,T )dν = 8πh(ν3/c3)(e hν/kT – 1)᎑1dν (1)
where ν is the frequency of the radiation, T is the temperature,
k is the Boltzmann constant, h is Planck’s constant, and c is
the velocity of light. Equation 1 gives the energy density of
the radiation in units of J/m3 between the frequencies ν and
ν + dν .
Wien (preceding Planck) deduced an empirical expres-
sion for the energy density (14 )
ρ(ν,T )dν = αν3e᎑βν/T dν (2)
where α and β are constants. If hν >> kT, then the Planck
radiation law reduces to the Wien expression and the con-
stants α and β may be obtained by comparing the two radia-
tion laws, α = 8πh/c3 and β = h/k. Substituting for α and β,
the Wien formula becomes
ρ(ν,T )dν = 8πh(ν3/c3)e᎑hν/kT dν (3)
Initially eq 2 was in substantial agreement with experimental
measurements, but later discrepancies were noted (8, p 6).
We anticipate the same trend with the CBR data.
COBE Satellite Data
We are interested in the spectral brightness function, B,
which was measured by the FIRAS (far infrared astronomical
spectrometer) instrument on board the COBE satellite. The
quantity B is the incident energy flux in units of W/(m2 sr Hz)
(sr is a steradian, a unit solid angle), and is given by
B = (c/4π)ρ(ν,T ) (4)
Thus the Planck brightness function is
B = 2h(ν3/c2)(e hν/kT – 1)᎑1 (5)
and the Wien brightness function becomes
B = 2h(ν3/c2)e᎑hν/kT (6)
Table 1 gives the COBE satellite data1(7). In the table,
ν̄ is the wavenumber, w is the relative weight of each point,
and B is the spectral brightness function, and
w = γσ ᎑2 (7)
Here σ is the standard deviation of the measured brightness
function and γ is a scale factor. Since γ has no bearing on the
computations to follow (15), it is set equal to one.
Exercise 1
To test whether the COBE data of Table 1 fit a black-
body radiation spectrum, students are asked to find the
temperature of the microwave background radiation. The
Microsoft Excel Solver program is used to perform the non-
linear least-squares curve fitting (16, 17 ). The advantage of
this powerful spreadsheet tool is that it is easy to learn and
employ. The Solver program uses the least squares principle
that minimizes the quantity X 2, defined as the sum of the
squares of the deviations (eq 8):
X 2 = ∑[w i (B i – B i,calc) 2 ] (8)

JChemEd.chem.wisc.edu • Vol. 78 No. 2 February 2001 • Journal of Chemical Education 215

 In the Classroom

Here B i is the measured brightness function at wavenumber Table 1. Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation
ν̄i and B i,calc is the calculated value of the brightness function Data from the COBE Satellite Experiment
(eq 5 or 6) with an initial guess inserted for the temperature ν̄/cm᎑1 w/10᎑3 B /10᎑18 ν̄/cm᎑1 w/10᎑3 B /10᎑18
T. The Solver program varies the coefficient T until the best
2.27 5.10 2.0110 12.25 1.89 1.1438
match is found. When using Solver, the factor 10᎑18 in B i and
2.72 2.77 2.5003 12.71 1.89 1.0019
B i,calc is omitted. Constant multiplicative factors have no effect
on minimizing X 2. An inceptive value of, say, T = 5 K leads 3.18 1.60 2.9369 13.16 2.07 0.8771
to a final temperature of 2.728 K for the Planck distribution 3.63 1.89 3.2858 13.61 2.27 0.7648
and 2.748 K for the Wien formula. 4.08 2.07 3.5503 14.07 2.50 0.6631
The equations given by Shoemaker (15) are used to find 4.54 2.27 3.7316 14.52 2.77 0.5749
the standard deviation of the temperature, 4.99 3.09 3.8269 14.97 2.77 0.4965
s(T ) = B111/2s(1) (9) 5.45 3.09 3.8477 15.43 2.77 0.4265
5.90 3.91 3.8027 15.88 2.27 0.3669
where B11 is the term in the inverse 1 × 1 matrix, A, con-
6.35 5.10 3.7025 16.34 1.89 0.3136
taining dB/dT, the derivative of the brightness function with
respect to temperature. Presently, 6.81 5.92 3.5551 16.79 1.48 0.2684
7.26 6.94 3.3773 17.24 1.28 0.2287
B11 = [∑w i (dB/dT )2]᎑1 (10) 7.71 8.26 3.1752 17.70 1.11 0.1945
The variance of an observation of unit weight, s(1)2, is given by 8.17 10.00 2.9535 18.15 0.98 0.1657
8.62 8.26 2.7281 18.61 0.92 0.1396
s(1)2 =X 2
min/(m – n) (11)
9.08 6.94 2.4957 19.06 0.82 0.1185
2 2
where X min is the minimum value of X in eq 8, m is the 9.53 5.10 2.2721 19.51 0.59 0.1003
number of observations, and n, the number of adjustable 9.98 3.91 2.0552 19.97 0.33 0.0846
parameters, is 1. The standard deviations in the parameter
10.44 3.09 1.8438 20.42 0.13 0.0717
T calculated from eq 9 are s(T,Planck) = 1 × 10᎑5 K and
s(T,Wien) = 8 × 10᎑3 K. The literature value2 for the tem- 10.89 2.07 1.6488 20.87 0.042 0.0587
perature T and its uncertainty is 2.728 ± 0.002 K (7). The 11.34 2.07 1.4672 21.33 0.013 0.0459
fit of the data to the Planck radiation law (see Fig. 1) is so 11.80 1.89 1.2973
precise, the astounding observation of recent cosmology, that Note: ν̄ is the wavenumber, w is the relative weight of each point,
it is regarded as the best evidence for the big bang theory. and B is the spectral brightness function.
The Wien brightness function depicted in Figure 1 shows
the small discrepancies from the measured points that led to 4.5

its rejection.
We calculate an F distribution to test whether the dif- 4.0 Planck
ference between the two radiation expressions is significant . 3.5
The F distribution with the same number of degrees of
freedom is given by (18, 19) 3.0

F= s(1)2(Wien)/s(1)2(Planck) (12)
B / 10᎑18

2.5

The calculated value of F is 1 × 10 , and the Planck radiation

6
2.0
law is statistically preferred, since F exceeds a published F Wien
value at any confidence level. 1.5

Exercise 2 1.0

The well-known Wien displacement law (9, p 219; 12, 0.5

p 956; 20) relates the frequency at the maximum in the black-
body spectrum to temperature T. Setting dB/dν = 0 in the
Planck distribution (eq 5) and replacing the frequency ν with
the wavenumber ν̄ = ν/c leads to
hc ν̄/kT = 3(1 – e᎑hc ν̄/kT ) (13)
Letting x = hc ν̄/kT simplifies eq 13 to
x + 3e᎑x = 3 (14)
Using the Solver program, we find x = 2.8214. Upon insertion
of values for the universal constants in the definition of x,
Wien’s displacement law becomes
ν̄max = 1.961 (cm᎑1 K᎑1) T
If T = 2.728 K is substituted in eq 15, the maximum wave-
number is predicted to be ν̄max = 5.350 cm᎑1. Employing two
points before and after the maximum in Figure 1 on a large-
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Wavenumber / cm᎑1
Figure 1. Spectrum of the blackbody radiation. The points are the
cosmic microwave background radiation data measured by the
COBE satellite experiment. The curve labeled “Planck” was com-
puted from eq 5 with T = 2.728 K; the curve labeled “Wien” was
calculated from eq 6 with T = 2.748 K.
scale graph or by a polynomial fit, we find ν̄max(expt) =
5.352 cm᎑1. The agreement with the value calculated from
(15)
Wien’s displacement law, based on the Planck radiation
expression, is excellent. Wien’s displacement law has been used
regularly to estimate the surface temperature of stars from
their peak emission.

216 Journal of Chemical Education • Vol. 78 No. 2 February 2001 • JChemEd.chem.wisc.edu


Exercise 3
The CBR data given in Table 1 are utilized to calculate
the Stefan–Boltzmann constant. Let e(T ) be the total energy
flux radiated by a black body,
e(T ) = (c/4) ∫ ρ(ν,T )dν (16)
After integrating between the limits zero and infinity we
find (9, p 218)
e(T ) = σT 4 (17)
The quantity
σ = 2π5k4/15h3c 2 (18)
is called the Stefan–Boltzmann constant and has a value of
σ = 5.67 × 10᎑8 J/(m2 s K4).
Equation 17 is known as the Stefan–Boltzmann equation.
Solving eq 17 for σ and combining with eqs 16 and 4 gives
σ = (πc/T 4) ∫ B dν̄ (19)
To compute σ we evaluate the integral in eq 19 by using the
trapezoidal rule (21) on the CBR data in Table 1 (T = 2.728 K).
It is best to extend the data to zero wavenumber (and B = 0)
by adding three points below 2 cm᎑1 that are calculated from
eq 5. An additional point is added beyond 22 cm᎑1, to where
B is essentially zero. Using this procedure with a spreadsheet,
we find σ(expt)= 5.66 × 10᎑8 J/(m2 s K4), in very close agree-
ment with the Stefan–Boltzmann constant σ given above.
Additional Exercises
The following additional exercises are suggested.
Exercise 4
Proceeding in the footsteps of Max Planck, Avogadro’s
number NA may be determined. Regarding h and h/k as two
adjustable parameters in eq 5 (T = 2.728 K), the Solver
program is used to minimize eq 8. After obtaining h and h/k,
the Boltzmann constant k is calculated, and with the gas con-
stant R, NA, is computed. Planck obtained the value NA by
curve-fitting a wide range of frequency and temperature data,
and with the known Faraday constant Ᏺ, he computed the
electronic charge e = Ᏺ/NA. Notably, Planck’s value of e =
1.57 × 10᎑19 C differs from today’s accepted value by only
2% (22, 23).
Exercise 5
For comparison, the data may be fit to the Raleigh–
Jeans radiation law (9, p 219; 12, p 956). Raleigh used the
theorem of equipartition for the energy ε of an oscillator, ε =
kT. Agreement between the Raleigh–Jeans formula and the
experimental data occurs when h ν << kT. Planck’s success
stems from his rejection of the classical theory that radiation
may be exchanged continuously. Instead, he postulated a
discontinuity of emission and absorption of radiation in
discrete amounts that are integral multiples of a fundamental
unit of energy, h ν.
Exercise 6
Students can show that the empirical Wien radiation
formula, eq 6, obeys Wien’s displacement law, namely, ν̄max =
constant × T. They may evaluate the constant and compare
it with the measured value obtained in Exercise 2.
JChemEd.chem.wisc.edu • Vol. 78 No. 2 February 2001 • Journal of Chemical Education
In the Classroom
Conclusion
The introduction of cosmological data into the physical
chemistry curriculum adds interest in studying the origin
of quantum mechanics. Students have found the exercises
fulfilling, engaging, and not difficult once they delve into
the spreadsheet calculations. However, they usually require
a worked example involving Microsoft Excel Solver and a
review of the trapezoidal rule. The CBR data fit Planck’s
radiation law so well that students are rewarded with dupli-
cating literature values for computed quantities.
Acknowledgments
I am grateful to M. Bucher, B. Gump, and D. Zellmer
for their helpful suggestions in preparing this article; and I
am indebted to Edward L Wright, Department of Astronomy,
University of California at Los Angeles, for help with the
1994 version of the FIRAS data file.
Notes
1. I translated the FIRAS data file to SI units.
2. The statistical uncertainty is 1 × 10᎑5 K, while the system-
atic instrument error is 2 × 10᎑3 K and leads to a final uncertainty
of 2 × 10᎑3 K (7 ).
Literature Cited
1. Guth, A. H. The Inflationary Universe; Perseus: Reading, MA,
1997.
2. Chown, M. Afterglow of Creation; University Science Books:
Sausalito, CA, 1996.
3. Hogan, C. J. The Little Book of the Big Bang; Springer: New
York, 1998.
4. Rioux, F. Enriching Quantum Chemistry with Mathcad (data
files); J. Chem. Educ. Software 1997, 9C1; 1994, 1D2.
5. Rechtsteiner, G. A.; Ganske, J. A. Chem. Educator 1998, 3, 1.
6. Mather, J. C.; Cheng, E. S.; Eplee, R. E. Jr.; Isaacman, R. B.;
Meyer, S. S.; Shafer, R. A.; Weiss, R.; Wright, E. L.; Bennett,
C. L.; Boggess, N. W.; Dwek, E.; Gulkis, S.; Hauser, M. G.;
Janssen, M.; Kelsall, T.; Lubin, P. M.; Moseley, S. H. Jr.;
Murdock, T. L.; Silverberg, R. F.; Smoot, G. F.; Wilkinson,
D. T. Astrophys. J. Lett. 1990, 354, L37.
7. Fixsen, D. J.; Cheng, E. S.; Cottingham, D. A.; Eplee, R.
E. Jr.; Isaacman, R. B.; Mather, J. C.; Meyer, S. S.;
Noerdlinger, P. D.; Shafer, R. A.; Weiss, R.; Wright, E. L.;
Bennett, C. L.; Boggess, N. W.; Kelsall, T.; Moseley, S. H.;
Silverberg, R. F.; Smoot, G. F.; Wilkinson, D. T. Astrophys.
J. 1994, 420, 445.
8. Bohm, D. Quantum Theory; Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs,
NJ, 1951.
9. Davidson, N.; Statistical Mechanics; McGraw-Hill: New York,
1962.
10. Richtmeyer, F. K. Introduction to Modern Physics; McGraw-
Hill: New York, 1935.
11. Moore, W. J. Physical Chemistry, 4th ed.; Prentice-Hall: Engle-
wood Cliffs, NJ, 1972.
12. Noggle, J. H. Physical Chemistry, 3rd ed.; HarperCollins: New
York, 1996.
13. Adamson, A. W. A Textbook of Physical Chemistry, 2nd ed.;
Academic: New York, 1973.
217
In the Classroom

14. Rosenberg, R. M. Principles of Physical Chemistry, Oxford Uni-
versity Press: New York, 1977.
15. Shoemaker, D. P.; Garland C. W.; Niber, J. W. Experiments in
Physical Chemistry, 5th ed.; McGraw-Hill Book Co.: New York,
1989, Chapter 20.
16. Harris, D. J. Chem. Educ. 1998, 75, 119.
17. de Levie, R. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76, 1594.
18. Shoemaker, D. P.; Garland C. W.; Niber, J. W. Op. cit.; p 815.
19. Zielinski, T. J.; Allendoerfer, R. D. J. Chem. Educ. 1997, 74, 1001.
20. Larsen, R. D. J. Chem. Educ. 1985, 62, 199.
21. Noggle, J. H. Physical Chemistry on a Microcomputer; Little
Brown: Boston, 1985; Chapter 5.
22. Planck, M. Ann. Phys. 1901, 309, 553.
23. Planck, M. Ann. Phys. 1901, 309, 564.

218 Journal of Chemical Education • Vol. 78 No. 2 February 2001 • JChemEd.chem.wisc.edu