Differences between Boltzmann and Fermi-Dirac distributions

In summary, the Boltzmann distribution is commonly used for systems such as a container of an ideal gas, but can also be applied to other systems such as a DNA molecule with increasing energy. The grand canonical ensemble is a "trick" that allows for the consideration of quantum statistics and can be used for systems with a fixed number of particles by setting the chemical potential. The chemical potential is defined for any particle in the system and can fluctuate depending on the equilibrium of the system.
  • #1
Urmi Roy
753
1
Hi All,

In relation to the Boltzmann distribution vs the FD/BE distributions in different applications, I have 2 basic questions:

1. The Boltzmann distribution comes most easily from the Canonical Ensemble (constant N, V,T) while the FD/BE come from the Grand Canonical ensemble (constant .mu, V, T).

Intuitively, I picture the Boltzmann distribution being used for systems such as a container of an ideal gas. This makes sense to me, but in my h/w I got a question where I had to apply the Boltzmann distribution to a DNA molecule which increases energy by 'e' every time a bond breaks. I don't understand however how the Boltzmann distribution is applicable here, as this problem has nothing to do with V or T.

2. For an electron, I don't see why the grand canonical ensemble is applicable because I don't see how a 'chemical potential reservoir' is applicable to an electron nor how the temperature of an electron is fixed.

Please help me understand these concepts!U
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Urmi Roy said:
1. The Boltzmann distribution comes most easily from the Canonical Ensemble (constant N, V,T) while the FD/BE come from the Grand Canonical ensemble (constant .mu, V, T).

Intuitively, I picture the Boltzmann distribution being used for systems such as a container of an ideal gas. This makes sense to me, but in my h/w I got a question where I had to apply the Boltzmann distribution to a DNA molecule which increases energy by 'e' every time a bond breaks. I don't understand however how the Boltzmann distribution is applicable here, as this problem has nothing to do with V or T.
In the canonical ensemble, the system is connected to a reservoir at fixed T, with which it can exchange energy. Therefore, the system is taken at being at a fixed temperature, instead of a fixed energy. I guess that in the problem, you had to calculate probabilities of a DNA molecule being broken at a certain T.

Urmi Roy said:
2. For an electron, I don't see why the grand canonical ensemble is applicable because I don't see how a 'chemical potential reservoir' is applicable to an electron nor how the temperature of an electron is fixed.
Going to the grand canonical ensemble can be seen as a "trick" that allows to take into account the peculiarities of the quantum statistics. You can still work with a fixed number of particles by setting the chemical potential such that the total average number of particles is equal to the (fixed) desired number, with fluctuations too small to matter. As for temperature, it is the same thing: the system can exchange energy with a reservoir at a given T, and hence at equilibrium will also have a temperature T.
 
  • #3
DrClaude said:
In the canonical ensemble, the system is connected to a reservoir at fixed T, with which it can exchange energy. Therefore, the system is taken at being at a fixed temperature, instead of a fixed energy. I guess that in the problem, you had to calculate probabilities of a DNA molecule being broken at a certain T.

Yup, you're absolutely right and I realize that now. I also find from my notes that the Grand canonical system also considers constant T but as you mentioned, it is a trick to restrict number of particles (by fixing the chemical potential= reservoir chem. potential). So is it true that for the DNA case, I could choose either the canonical or the grand canonical ensemble, since I'm not defining anything other than the T of the system...Volume doesn't make any sense here and number of particles N doesn't make sense either...I could write out the sum of probabilities, make it =1, and find the partition factor. It would result in a different distribution that looks a lot like the Boltzmann distribution, just with the mu in it.

DrClaude said:
Going to the grand canonical ensemble can be seen as a "trick" that allows to take into account the peculiarities of the quantum statistics. You can still work with a fixed number of particles by setting the chemical potential such that the total average number of particles is equal to the (fixed) desired number, with fluctuations too small to matter. As for temperature, it is the same thing: the system can exchange energy with a reservoir at a given T, and hence at equilibrium will also have a temperature T.

Ok so regarding an electron, I still understand what exactly the chemical potential of an electron is...isn't chemical potential defined for molecules and ions?

Thanks for your help, I think I'm getting there!
 
  • #4
Urmi Roy said:
Ok so regarding an electron, I still understand what exactly the chemical potential of an electron is...isn't chemical potential defined for molecules and ions?
The chemical potential is defined for any particle that is part of the system, especially if its number can fluctuate. For example, in a mixture of neutral atoms and the corresponding ions and electrons, all three particle numbers will fluctuate as atoms get ionized and ions and electrons recombine into neutral atoms.
All three species will have a chemical potential, and the fraction of neutral atoms at equilibrium will depend on all three μ's.
 

1. What is the main difference between Boltzmann and Fermi-Dirac distributions?

The main difference between Boltzmann and Fermi-Dirac distributions is that Boltzmann distribution describes the statistical behavior of a classical system with distinguishable particles, while Fermi-Dirac distribution describes the behavior of a quantum system with indistinguishable particles.

2. How do the two distributions differ in terms of particle occupancy?

In Boltzmann distribution, particles can occupy the same energy state, while in Fermi-Dirac distribution, no two particles can occupy the same energy state due to the Pauli exclusion principle.

3. What is the significance of temperature in these distributions?

Temperature plays a crucial role in both Boltzmann and Fermi-Dirac distributions. In Boltzmann distribution, temperature determines the average energy of the particles, while in Fermi-Dirac distribution, temperature affects the probability of a particle occupying a certain energy state.

4. Can these distributions be applied to both classical and quantum systems?

Yes, Boltzmann distribution can be applied to classical systems, while Fermi-Dirac distribution is applicable to quantum systems. However, in the classical limit (high temperature or low density), Fermi-Dirac distribution reduces to Boltzmann distribution.

5. Are there any real-world applications of these distributions?

Both Boltzmann and Fermi-Dirac distributions have numerous applications in various fields such as statistical mechanics, thermodynamics, and solid-state physics. They are used to describe the behavior of particles in systems ranging from gases and liquids to metals and semiconductors.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Atomic and Condensed Matter
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Atomic and Condensed Matter
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Thermodynamics
Replies
17
Views
939
Replies
6
Views
827
  • Atomic and Condensed Matter
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • Atomic and Condensed Matter
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Back
Top