Canonical Bose-Einstein statistics

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Bose-Einstein statistics are typically derived using the grand canonical partition function, as discussed in the forum. The user presents their own derivation, starting from the grand canonical partition function and imposing the constraint of particle number, leading to an expression that includes a chemical potential term. The discussion highlights confusion regarding the notation used for the combined expression of Fermi-Dirac and Bose-Einstein statistics, specifically the use of (1-e^x)^{\pm}. The need for a canonical ensemble expression for Bose-Einstein statistics is emphasized, with a call for clarity and comparison against standard sources.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Bose-Einstein statistics
  • Familiarity with grand canonical partition functions
  • Knowledge of Fermi-Dirac statistics
  • Basic concepts of statistical mechanics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the canonical partition function for Bose-Einstein statistics
  • Study the derivation of the grand canonical ensemble in statistical mechanics
  • Explore the implications of chemical potential in statistical distributions
  • Investigate the notation and mathematical expressions used in quantum statistics
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of statistical mechanics, and researchers interested in quantum statistics and the behavior of bosons and fermions.

quetzalcoatl9
Messages
535
Reaction score
1
I've been curious as to why Bose-Einstein statistics are always derived using the grand canonical partition function. Yes, I know it is easier, but there must also be an expression for the canonical ensemble. However, I was suprised that I have been unable to find it in the standard sources - so here is my own (troubled) derivation.

I start with the grand canonical partition function:

\sum^{0,1,..,M}_{\{n_k\}} \prod^{\infinty}_{k=1} e^{-\beta\left(\epsilon_k - \mu\right) n_k

where M is 1 for FD and M is infinity for BE stats.

I now impose the constraint of N=\sum_k n_k and wind up with:

\lambda^{N} \prod_{k=1}^{\infinty} \left(1 - e^{-\beta \epsilon_k} \right)^{\pm} = Z_{BE}^{FD}

why didn't the chemical potential go away? I was expecting to get the same expression, but without any lambda term out in front.

Any ideas? Anyone at least KNOW what the canonical expression IS (so that I can compare my answer)?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
everyone and his brother seem to be researching BE condensates these days, and yet no one is the least bit curious about this?
 
don't understand your notation
(1-e^x)^{\pm}?
what is to the power of +/-? as you know, you get either (1-e^x) or (1+e^x)
 
mjsd said:
don't understand your notation
(1-e^x)^{\pm}?
what is to the power of +/-? as you know, you get either (1-e^x) or (1+e^x)

no...it means you get "a" or "1/a"...

this is the standard way of writing Fermi-Dirac or Bose-Einstein statistics as combined in one expression, the notation isn't mine...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K