File talk:Solar spectrum en.svg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Black body temperature[edit]

The black body spectrum of the sun is usually given as 5777K (5504°C) instead of 5250°C, the curve in the picture seams to have its peak wavelength at 514nm, which would be a black body of 5638K(5365°C). I would just change the label to 5777K, but maybe someone wants to fix it properly with a new curve? Simonschmeisser (talk)

Graphic translated into Spanish[edit]

Está en https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Solar_spectrum_es.svg

infrared threshold is incorrect in this chart.[edit]

This chart shows infrared starting above 700 nm but the threshold is 800 nm. Thus the chart dotted line is incorrect.

add source data to description?[edit]

The NREL data have moved, but you can find them here:

Look at the "Data Files" section to get Excel files with the raw data. Should these links be added to the image? I s'pose it's worth asking: did the authors of the SVG use the NREL data to make the image, or did they interpolate from the PNG version File:Solar Spectrum.png? 136.49.93.101 00:50, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong units[edit]

On the vertical scale the units should be KW/m2/nm, please compare with the same graph here: File:Sonne Strahlungsintensitaet.svg Grüße vom Sänger ♫ (talk) 07:31, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Should be spelled kilowatt (no capitals, no plural) per meter squared per nanometer = kW/m²/nm (proper superscript 2 and kilo in lowecase) = kW m⁻² nm⁻¹ (negative exponents instead slashes, as per SI rec.). ✓ Fixed. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 14:14, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong values[edit]

≈1kW/nm/m² at ground level on earth is nonsense - after integration across the spectral band this means >1MW/m² and with a human-body-surface of 1m² this would immediately set everyone on fire that walks in the open. - Please correct this immediately! Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.31.6.10 (talk) 08:38, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I came here because of this post by user:Paclogic. Now that I looked carefully at the values in both svg, and have estimated the values for it, I come the the same conclusion as the IP here. And I have seen my cause of error: In File:Sonne Strahlungsintensitaet.svg it's /µm, here it's /nm, that's a difference of 10-3, and that's why the k is in the denominator there, and must not be here. Sorry for my quite hasty comment, a bit of thinking would have saved us both some time (me less then you probably]. Grüße vom Sänger ♫ (talk) 10:26, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, W/(m²*nm) = kW/(m²*µm) = MW/(m²*mm). Again, sorry for my initial too fast reaction, where I omitted the difference between nano and micro. Grüße vom Sänger ♫ (talk) 05:15, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Tuvalkin: Yes, please change back to W/(m^2*nm). You can easily convince yourself with an order-of-magnitude calculation: The graph shows about 1000 nm on the horizontal axis and the average value is (very roughly) about 1 W/(m^2*nm). If you multiply them, you get about 1000 W/m^2, which is the correct order-of-magnitude for total solar irradiance. With the unit kW/(m^2*nm) you get a value about 1000 times too high. See also: https://rredc.nrel.gov/solar//spectra/am1.5/ --ESteiner (talk) 19:08, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Earth's magnetic field[edit]

is the lack of values on the high energy end of the spectrum corresponding to the expected blackbody radiation curve due to the magnetic field of the earth? or is it some other effect? 83.47.201.5 10:05, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File_talk:Solar_spectrum_en.svg&oldid=482399594"