Closed form expression for the partition function Z using the Canonical Ensemble

Click For Summary
A closed form expression for the partition function Z in the Canonical Ensemble is derived from the sum Z = Sum notation(j=0...N) e^(-beta*j*delta e). By substituting t = (k_B*T)/delta e, the expression simplifies to Z = Sum notation(j=0...N) e^(-j/t), which represents a geometric series. For N approaching infinity, the closed form can be obtained as Z = 1/(1 - e^(-1/t)), where the series converges. The term "lambda_1" mentioned in the discussion remains undefined, but it is suggested to relate it to the parameters provided. The conversation concludes with a successful graphing of Z vs. t based on the derived expressions.
haitrungdo82
Messages
22
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I'm looking for a closed form expression for the partition function Z using the Canonical Ensemble



Homework Equations


epsilon_j - epsilon_j-1 = delta e
Z = Sum notation(j=0...N) e^(-beta*j*delta e)
beta = 1/(k_B*T)
t = (k_B*T)/delta e
N is the number of excited states

The Attempt at a Solution


I am given Z = Sum notation(j=0...N) e^(-beta*j*delta e). But the question asks me
to graph (in MathCAD) Z vs. t, where t = (k_B*T)/delta e. So, if I substitute t = (k_B*T)/delta e into the original Z, then Z becomes Z = Sum notation (j=0...N) e^-(j/t). Then I sketched Z vs. t for N = 25. It is fine!

However, then I have to sketch Z vs. t for N appoaches infinitive. This is a problem. My Professor told me that, for this case, I have to use the closed form of Z. The only closed form expression that I know is Z = e^[1-(lambda_1/k_B)]. But..."lambda_1" doesn't make sense to me. Specifically, I'm looking for a closed form expression that relates the parameters that I am given, or a definition of "lambda_1" that includes the given parameters. When I know it, I will be able to make a graph.

Could anyone help me, please?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The sum of e^(-j/t) over j is a geometric series. It's r^j where r=e^(-1/t). Look up 'geometric series'. You shouldn't have any problem finding a closed form expression for the sum over j from 0 to infinity.
 
Dick said:
The sum of e^(-j/t) over j is a geometric series. It's r^j where r=e^(-1/t). Look up 'geometric series'. You shouldn't have any problem finding a closed form expression for the sum over j from 0 to infinity.



Hi Dick! I was able to sketch the graph thanks to your advice. Good job!
 

Similar threads

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