Canonical Bose-Einstein statistics

  • #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:

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

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

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

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

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:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
everyone and his brother seem to be researching BE condensates these days, and yet no one is the least bit curious about this???
 
  • #3
mjsd
Homework Helper
726
3
don't understand your notation
[tex](1-e^x)^{\pm}[/tex]?
what is to the power of +/-? as you know, you get either (1-e^x) or (1+e^x)
 
  • #4
don't understand your notation
[tex](1-e^x)^{\pm}[/tex]?
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...
 

Related Threads on Canonical Bose-Einstein statistics

  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
606
  • Last Post
Replies
19
Views
6K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
681
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
3K
Top