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?
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top