Why are the equations for mean energy in the canonical ensemble equal?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between two equations for mean energy in a canonical ensemble, specifically why they are equal. The first equation is derived from the definition of the canonical partition function Z, which involves the Hamiltonian of the system. The mean energy is expressed as the negative derivative of the logarithm of Z with respect to beta. The connection to temperature is clarified by using the chain rule, leading to the expression that relates changes in beta to changes in temperature. Ultimately, the equality of the two equations is established through proper application of thermodynamic principles and differentiation.
Abigale
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
Hi,
I regard an equation for an canonical ensemble.
I do not understand why both equations should be equal.

\bar{E}= -\frac{ \partial \ln{(Z)}}{ \partial \beta} \overset{\text{?}} = k T ^{2 } \frac{\partial \ln{(Z)}}{\partial T}

Z is a canonical partition function.
\beta = \frac{1}{kT}.
Thx
Abby
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Try the chain rule.
 
Do you under stand the first equation? That simply comes from the definition of the partition sum
Z=\mathrm{Tr} \exp(-\beta \hat{H}),
where \hat{H} is the Hamiltnian of the system. The Canonical Statistical Operator is
\hat{R}=\frac{1}{Z} \exp(-\beta \hat{H}).
The mean energy is
\overline{E}=\mathrm{Tr}(\hat{R} \hat{H})=-\frac{1}{Z} \frac{\partial Z}{\partial \beta}=-\frac{\partial \ln Z}{\partial \beta}.
As it turns out by comparing with the first Law of thermodynamics, you have
\beta=\frac{1}{k T},
where T is the temperature (contrary what you've written in your posting!).

Then of course you have for any function of the temperature
\frac{\partial f}{\partial \beta}=\frac{\partial f}{\partial T} \frac{\partial T}{\partial \beta}.
From the above formula you find T=1/(k \beta) and thus
\frac{\partial T}{\partial \beta}=-\frac{1}{k \beta^2}=-k T^2.
This gives
\overline{E}=k T^2\frac{\partial \ln Z}{\partial T}.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Thread 'Griffith, Electrodynamics, 4th Edition, Example 4.8. (First part)'
I am reading the Griffith, Electrodynamics book, 4th edition, Example 4.8 and stuck at some statements. It's little bit confused. > Example 4.8. Suppose the entire region below the plane ##z=0## in Fig. 4.28 is filled with uniform linear dielectric material of susceptibility ##\chi_e##. Calculate the force on a point charge ##q## situated a distance ##d## above the origin. Solution : The surface bound charge on the ##xy## plane is of opposite sign to ##q##, so the force will be...
Dear all, in an encounter of an infamous claim by Gerlich and Tscheuschner that the Greenhouse effect is inconsistent with the 2nd law of thermodynamics I came to a simple thought experiment which I wanted to share with you to check my understanding and brush up my knowledge. The thought experiment I tried to calculate through is as follows. I have a sphere (1) with radius ##r##, acting like a black body at a temperature of exactly ##T_1 = 500 K##. With Stefan-Boltzmann you can calculate...

Similar threads

Back
Top