Canonical Ensemble Homework: Equal Probabilities Postulate

ehrenfest
Messages
2,001
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


In the canonical ensemble, the probability that a system is in state r is given by

P_i = \frac{g_i \exp (-\beta E_i)}{\sum_i g_i \exp( -\beta E_i)}

where g_i is the multiplicity of state i. This is confusing me because I thought

P_i = \frac{g_i}{\sum_i g_i} = states consistent with i / total number of states

was always true by the equal probabilities postulate. What am I missing? Are those two expressions the same?

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
ehrenfest said:

Homework Statement


In the canonical ensemble, the probability that a system is in state r is given by

P_i = \frac{g_i \exp (-\beta E_i)}{\sum_i g_i \exp( -\beta E_i)}

where g_i is the multiplicity of state i. This is confusing me because I thought

P_i = \frac{g_i}{\sum_i g_i} = states consistent with i / total number of states

was always true by the equal probabilities postulate. What am I missing? Are those two expressions the same?


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


The basic idea of stat mech is that the configurations of different energies are not equally likely. The higher the energy of a state is, the least likely the system will be in that state. This is reflected in the Boltzmann distribution you cite at the top. Your second equation would be valid if all states (irrespective of their energy) would be equally probable.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top