Derivation of the Boltzmann Distribution

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the application of the Lagrange Multiplier method in deriving the Boltzmann distribution, specifically addressing the differentiation of the function with respect to particle numbers \(N_i\). The key point is the distinction between partial differentiation (\(\frac{\partial f}{\partial N_i}\)) and total differentiation (\(\frac{df}{dN_i}\)). The correct approach is to treat \(N\) as a constant during partial differentiation, as the total number of particles \(N\) is fixed, which leads to the accurate equation \(\frac{\partial f}{\partial N_i} = \ln{g_i} - \ln{N_i} - (\alpha + \beta \epsilon_i)\). Substituting \(N = \sum_{i=1}^n N_i\) before differentiation introduces additional terms that complicate the solution.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lagrange Multipliers in statistical mechanics
  • Familiarity with Boltzmann distribution concepts
  • Knowledge of partial vs. total differentiation
  • Basic principles of Maxwell-Boltzmann statistics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of Lagrange Multipliers in thermodynamics
  • Learn about the derivation of the Boltzmann distribution in detail
  • Explore the differences between partial and total derivatives in calculus
  • Investigate the implications of constraints in statistical mechanics
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in physics, particularly those focusing on statistical mechanics, thermodynamics, and mathematical methods in physics. This discussion is beneficial for anyone looking to deepen their understanding of the Boltzmann distribution and its derivation techniques.

Peter Forbes
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I have a question about the Lagrange Multiplier method used to derive the Boltzmann distribution. I'm following the first http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell%E2%80%93Boltzmann_statistics" .

I can get to this equation fine:
a35dba0357e0d45d9f2ef9844a8c5819.png


And I understand how they get the next line,
<br /> \frac{df}{dN_i}=\ln{g_i}-\ln{N_i}-(\alpha+\beta \epsilon_i)<br />
by considering N a constant when they do the partial differentiation.

However, since N=\sum_{i=1}^n N_i, can't I substitute that expression everywhere I have a N in the first equation? Then the differentiation gives me
<br /> \frac{df}{dN_i}=\ln{(\sum_{i=1}^n N_i)}+(\alpha-1)(\sum_{i=1}^n N_i)+\ln{g_i}-\ln{N_i}-(\alpha+\beta \epsilon_i)<br />

Which clearly has a different solution. Substituting for N before doing the partial derivative changes things...but why? I don't understand how one way should be any "more correct" than the other.

Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Science news on Phys.org
Actually you misquoted the Wikipedia page, it doesn't say
<br /> \frac{df}{dN_i}=\ln{g_i}-\ln{N_i}-(\alpha+\beta \epsilon_i)<br />
but it says
<br /> \frac{\partial f}{\partial N_i}=\ln{g_i}-\ln{N_i}-(\alpha+\beta \epsilon_i).<br />

The difference is the d on the left-hand side. If you do a partial derivation (with the curly d) with respect to N_i then you get the result that is given, because we can treat N as a constant. If you do a complete derivation (with the straight d) then indeed you get some extra terms:
\frac{df}{dN_i} = \frac{\partial f}{\partial N_i} + \frac{\partial f}{\partial N} \frac{\partial N}{\partial N_i}
assuming that none of the other quantities (g_i, \epsilon_i, \ldots) depends on Ni implicitly.

In this case, the partial derivative is the correct one because you are allowing the Ni's to vary, but you have a constraint on N (namely that the total number of particles is fixed, so N cannot change - therefore it is no use varying N and seeing if the function can be made smaller).
 
OK, thanks for the help.
But I still don't understand why we can't replace N with N=\sum_{i=1}^n N_i in the equation before we do the partial differentiation.

Note the first equation could be written
f(N_1,...N_n)=N\ln(N)-N + \alpha N + \beta E + N \sum_{i=1}^n (N_i \ln(g_i) - N_i \ln (N_i)-(\alpha+\beta \epsilon_i) N_i)

Where I've put the N outside the sum rather than the Ni's inside the sum. But the Ni's inside the sum are not treated as constants.

I understand that the partial derivatives mean keeping everything but the one variable constant. But there are equivalent ways of writing the same expression, which gives different answers after partial differentiation.

So I guess my question is, how would one know what form is the "correct one" to use before applying the partial differentiation?
 

Similar threads

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