Equiparition theorem, kinetic energy, temperatur

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the equipartition theorem and its implications for kinetic energy and temperature in a system of particles. The derivation presented shows that the temperature is related to the degrees of freedom (f) and the number of particles (N) through the equation <\sum_k^{3N-d} p_k \frac{\partial H}{\partial p_k}> = (3N-d) k_b T. The confusion arises regarding the upper bound of the sum, specifically how <\sum_k^{3N-d} \frac{p_k^2}{2 m}> equates to <\sum_k^{N} \frac{\vec p_k^2}{2 m}>. The discussion references a specific document for clarification on this topic.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the equipartition theorem
  • Familiarity with Hamiltonian mechanics
  • Knowledge of kinetic energy equations
  • Basic grasp of thermodynamic limits and degrees of freedom
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the equipartition theorem in classical statistical mechanics
  • Study Hamiltonian mechanics and its applications
  • Explore the relationship between kinetic energy and temperature in thermodynamic systems
  • Examine the document referenced for detailed derivations and examples
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of thermodynamics, and researchers in statistical mechanics seeking to deepen their understanding of the equipartition theorem and its applications in kinetic energy calculations.

Derivator
Messages
147
Reaction score
0
Hi,

according to the equipartition theorem

[itex]<p_k \frac{\partial H}{\partial p_k}> =k_bT[/itex] (where H depends on f generalized coodinates p and q and f is the number of degrees of freedom)

the temperature for a system of particles should be given by the result of the following derivation

[itex]<\sum_k^f p_k \frac{\partial H}{\partial p_k}> =\sum_k^f k_bT[/itex]
<=>
[itex]<\sum_k^f p_k \frac{\partial H}{\partial p_k}> = f k_b T[/itex]

now using [itex]f=3N-d[/itex] where N is the number of particles and d the number of 'constraints', one gets:
[itex]<\sum_k^{3N-d} p_k \frac{\partial H}{\partial p_k}> = (3N-d) k_b T[/itex]

using [itex]\frac{\partial H}{\partial p_k}=2\frac{p_k}{2m}[/itex] one gets:
[itex]<\sum_k^{3N-d} \frac{p_k^2}{2 m}> = \frac{3N-d}{2} k_b T[/itex]

however, the common result is:
[itex]<\sum_k^{N} \frac{\vec p_k^2}{2 m}> = \frac{3N-d}{2} k_b T[/itex] (note, that p_k is a vector)

That is, what people seem to do is, they don't write the kinetic energy on the left hand side as a sum of the components p_k, but as a sum over the momentum vectors:
[itex]<\sum_k^{N} \frac{\vec p_k^2}{2 m}>[/itex]

I don't see, how they manage the upper bound 3N-d of the sum. If the upper bound was only 3N, then the last equation for the kinetic energy would be obvious to me. That is, I would understand the following
[itex]<\sum_k^{3N} \frac{p_k^2}{2 m}> = <\sum_k^{N} \frac{\vec p_k^2}{2 m}>[/itex]
where the sum on the left hand side is going over the momentum components of all particles and the sum on the right hand side is going over the momentum-vectors of all particles.

but I don' t see, how people manage to get
[itex]<\sum_k^{3N-d} \frac{p_k^2}{2 m}> = <\sum_k^{N} \frac{\vec p_k^2}{2 m}>[/itex]for an example, please see page 11 of http://www.physics.buffalo.edu/phy411-506/topic3/lec-3-1.pdf (where d=3)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Because, in the thermodynamic limit, N is of order 1023 and d is only 3.
 
i see, only an approximation...

thank you.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K