I Bose-Einstein statistics for μ>ε

AI Thread Summary
The Gibbs sum for a system with chemical potential μ greater than energy ε simplifies to Z ≈ [λ exp(-ε/τ)]^N, leading to an average particle number ⟨N⟩ equal to N. However, this model becomes ineffective as it suggests that for any parameter X, ⟨X⟩ approaches X_N, rendering the model practically useless. Additionally, the Bose-Einstein distribution indicates that f(ε) becomes negative when μ exceeds ε, which is physically unacceptable. The discussion highlights that for bosons, the lowest energy state ε_0 imposes an upper limit on the chemical potential, with the phenomenon of Bose-Einstein condensation occurring as μ approaches ε_0. These insights raise questions about the physical validity of the model under the condition μ > ε.
LightPhoton
Messages
42
Reaction score
3
TL;DR Summary
Flaws in Bose-Einstein statistics for μ>ε
The Gibbs sum is given by

$$Z=\sum[\lambda \exp(-\varepsilon/\tau)]^N$$

where ##\lambda\equiv\exp(\mu/\tau)##. Since we are assuming ##\mu>\varepsilon##, we take only the last term of the sum because all others can be neglected.

thus

$$Z\approx[\lambda \exp(-\varepsilon/\tau)]^N$$

Now

$$\langle N\rangle =\lambda\frac{\partial}{\partial\lambda}\ln Z=\lambda\frac{\partial}{\partial\lambda}(N\ln\lambda-N\varepsilon/\tau)=N$$


But in general, we see that for any parameter ##X##

$$\langle X\rangle=\sum X_N[\lambda \exp(-\varepsilon/\tau)]^N/Z\approx X_N$$

where ##X_N## is the value at ##N\rightarrow\infty##, thus making the whole model useless.

But is this the only flaw in taking ##\mu>\varepsilon##?

That is, for the usual Bose-Einstein distribution

$$f(\varepsilon)=\frac1{\exp[(\varepsilon-\mu)/\tau]-1}$$

we get ##f(\varepsilon)<0## for ##\mu>\varepsilon##, which is physically wrong.

Are any such "physical" conditions present for the above model?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For bosons the energy ##\epsilon_0## of the lowest energy state sets an upper limit for the chemical potential. In case when the chemical potential ##\mu## approaches the lowest energy level ##\epsilon_0## from below (##\mu\rightarrow\epsilon_0##), the occupation of the lowest energy level diverges; this phenomenon is called the Bose-Einstein condensation.
 
  • Like
Likes Demystifier and pines-demon
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Hello! I am generating electrons from a 3D gaussian source. The electrons all have the same energy, but the direction is isotropic. The electron source is in between 2 plates that act as a capacitor, and one of them acts as a time of flight (tof) detector. I know the voltage on the plates very well, and I want to extract the center of the gaussian distribution (in one direction only), by measuring the tof of many electrons. So the uncertainty on the position is given by the tof uncertainty...
Back
Top