Dispersion of rightward steps in 1-D random walks

  • Thread starter Thread starter f3sicA_A
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Random walk
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on understanding why the quantity ##\overline{(\Delta n_1)^2}## is quadratic in displacement within the context of a 1-D random walk. The calculations show that ##\overline{(\Delta n_1)^2} = Npq##, where ##N## is the total number of steps, and ##p## and ##q## are the probabilities of moving right and left, respectively. The confusion arises from the relationship between this quantity and the displacement ##m = n_1 - n_2##, as well as the interpretation of the quadratic nature of ##\overline{(\Delta n_1)^2}##. The discussion suggests that the statement about quadratic dependence may not be essential to understanding the rest of the material, as the subsequent concepts about relative width of the distribution still hold. Overall, clarity on the quadratic relationship remains a point of inquiry.
f3sicA_A
Messages
25
Reaction score
7
Homework Statement
What is the relation between the dispersion of the rightward steps (##\overline{(\Delta n_1)^2}##) and the displacement of the random walker in a simple 1-D random walk?
Relevant Equations
$$\overline{(\Delta n_1)^2}=Npq$$

$$m=n_1-n_2$$
I am currently going through the first chapter of Fundamentals of Statistical and Thermal Physics by F. Reif which is on random walks, various mean values, etc. and specifically unit 1.4 mentions "The quantity ##\overline{(\Delta n_1)^2}## is quadratic in the displacement." This is with reference to a simple 1-D random walk where the probability of going to the right is ##p## and the probability of going to the left is ##q\equiv1-p##, where ##n_1## is the number of steps taken to the right and ##n_2## is the number of steps taken to the left, such that ##n_1+n_2\equiv N## is the total number of steps taken.

I am not able to verify as to why ##\overline{(\Delta n_1)^2}## must be quadratic in displacement, ##m=n_1-n_2## (the rightward displacement in units of step length ##l##), and I am not sure how to approach this problem. One thing we have shown just before this statement is:

$$\overline{(\Delta n_1)^2}\equiv\overline{(n_1-\overline{n_1})^2}$$
$$\implies\overline{(\Delta n_1)^2}=\overline{n_1^2-2n_1\overline{n_1}+(\overline{n_1})^2}$$
$$=\overline{n_1^2}-\overline{n_1}^2$$

where we have:

$$\overline{n_1}=\sum_{n_1=1}^{N}P(n_1)n_1$$
$$=\sum_{n_1=1}^{N}\frac{N!}{n_1!(N-n_1)!}p^{n_1}q^{N-n_1}n_1$$
here we have ##n_1p^{n_1}=p\partial {\left(p^{n_1}\right)}/\partial p##, so:

$$\overline{n_1}=\sum_{n_1=1}^{N}\frac{N!}{n_1!(N-n_1)!}\left[p\frac{\partial\left(p^{n_1}\right)}{\partial p}\right]q^{N-n_1}$$
$$=p\frac{\partial}{\partial p}\sum_{n_1=1}^{N}\frac{N!}{n_1!(N-n_1)!}p^{n_1}q^{N-n_1}$$
$$=p\frac{\partial(p+q)^{N}}{\partial p}$$
$$=pN(p+q)^{N-1}$$

and since we have $p+q=1$, in our case, ##\overline{n_1}=Np##. Similarly, we can follow a similar procedure to show that ##\overline{n_1^2}=\overline{n_1}^2+Npq##, and hence showing that:

$$\overline{(\Delta n_1)^2}=Npq$$

However, this does not convey to me the idea that ##\overline{(\Delta n_1)^2}## must be quadratic in ##m##, how should I start attempting this problem?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
f3sicA_A said:
"The quantity ##\overline{(\Delta n_1)^2}## is quadratic in the displacement."
I don’t even know what that statement means.
##\overline{(\Delta n_1)^2}## is a characteristic of the distribution, whereas the displacement, m, is a single value of a random variable.
Is there any ensuing text that clarifies it?
 
haruspex said:
Is there any ensuing text that clarifies it?
This is the exact paragraph from unit 1.4 of the book:
The quantity ##\overline{(\Delta n_1)^2}## is quadratic in the displacement. Its square root, i.e., the rms (root-mean-square) deviation ##\Delta^*n_1\equiv[\overline{(\Delta n_1)^2}]^{\frac{1}{2}}##, is a linear measure of the width of the range over which ##n_1## is distributed.
Before this paragraph is the proof for ##\overline{(\Delta n_1)^2}=Npq## and after this it talks about ##\Delta^*n_1/\overline{n_1}## being a good measure of relative width of the distribution.
 
f3sicA_A said:
This is the exact paragraph from unit 1.4 of the book:

Before this paragraph is the proof for ##\overline{(\Delta n_1)^2}=Npq## and after this it talks about ##\Delta^*n_1/\overline{n_1}## being a good measure of relative width of the distribution.
What if you simply ignore the statement that is bothering you/us? Does the rest make sense without it?
 
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Thread 'Minimum mass of a block'
Here we know that if block B is going to move up or just be at the verge of moving up ##Mg \sin \theta ## will act downwards and maximum static friction will act downwards ## \mu Mg \cos \theta ## Now what im confused by is how will we know " how quickly" block B reaches its maximum static friction value without any numbers, the suggested solution says that when block A is at its maximum extension, then block B will start to move up but with a certain set of values couldn't block A reach...
Back
Top