Ensemble vs. time averages and Ashcroft and Mermin Problem 1.1

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the relationship between ensemble averages and time averages in the context of collision probabilities for electrons, as outlined in Ashcroft and Mermin Problem 1.1. The calculations demonstrate that the probability of no collision over a time interval can be derived from dividing the interval into smaller, statistically independent segments, leading to the expression P_nc(t) = e^{-t/τ}. It is argued that the probability of the time interval between collisions is equivalent to the probability of an electron not colliding in one interval and then colliding in the next, reinforcing the independence of time intervals. For parts (c), (d), and (e), the focus shifts to determining the probability distribution of time until the next collision and the average time between collisions, which can be derived from the previously established probabilities. Overall, the discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding the statistical independence of time intervals in collision dynamics.
EE18
Messages
112
Reaction score
13
Homework Statement
Please see the attached photo.
Relevant Equations
See below.
The question is as seen below:
Screen Shot 2023-04-10 at 1.44.48 PM.png


My attempt (note that my questions are in bold below) is below. Please note that I am self-studying AM:

(a) By the independence of any interval ##dt## of time and time symmetry, we expect these two answers are the same (Is there any way to make this rigorous?). Divide the interval ##[0,t]## into ##N## intervals. Then the probability of no collision in ##[0,t]## is equal to the probability that there is no collision in each and every interval ##[t_i,t_i+t/N]##. Since each interval is statistically independent, we compute this probability (which we call ##P_{nc}(t)##) as the product of the probability of no collision in each interval, each of which is of length ##t/N## (i.e. these are i.i.d. intervals):
$$
P_{nc}(t) \equiv \lim_{n \to \infty} \left(1 - \frac{t}{N\tau}\right)^N = e^{-t/\tau}.
$$
We emphasize again that this is the probability that a given electron has not collided over the previous time ##t##, which is the same probability as that given electron not colliding over the future time ##t##.

(b)
The probability of the event that the time interval between collisions of an electron is ##t## can be argued (It's not clear to me why this should be the same as the probability that a given electron -- not necessarily just collided -- has time ##t## between two of its collisions.) to be the same as the probability of an electron which has just collided colliding again between ##t## and ##t+dt##. But this latter event is precisely the event ##A## that the electron does not collide in ##[0,t]## and ##B## also does collide in ##[t,t+dt)##. ##P(A)## is known from a), while ##P(B) = dt/\tau## from Drude Axiom 4. Thus, by the independence of different time intervals, we have ##P(A\&B) = P(A)P(B) = P_{nc}(t)dt/\tau = e^{-t/\tau}dt/\tau.##

For (c), (d), and (e), I am at a bit of a loss. I have read somewhere that I cannot seem to find now that perhaps this has something to do with the difference between an ensemble vs. time average, but it seems to me like what's really going on is that there is a different random variable under investigation in (c) and (d).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
EE18 said:
My attempt (note that my questions are in bold below) is below. Please note that I am self-studying AM:

(a) By the independence of any interval ##dt## of time and time symmetry, we expect these two answers are the same (Is there any way to make this rigorous?). Divide the interval ##[0,t]## into ##N## intervals. Then the probability of no collision in ##[0,t]## is equal to the probability that there is no collision in each and every interval ##[t_i,t_i+t/N]##. Since each interval is statistically independent, we compute this probability (which we call ##P_{nc}(t)##) as the product of the probability of no collision in each interval, each of which is of length ##t/N## (i.e. these are i.i.d. intervals):
$$
P_{nc}(t) \equiv \lim_{n \to \infty} \left(1 - \frac{t}{N\tau}\right)^N = e^{-t/\tau}.
$$
We emphasize again that this is the probability that a given electron has not collided over the previous time ##t##, which is the same probability as that given electron not colliding over the future time ##t##.
This looks good to me.

The reason we expect the same result for the preceding ##t## seconds and for the next ##t## seconds is that the calculations for the two cases are essentially identical. For the preceding ##t## seconds, you would work with the time interval ##[-t, 0]##; for the future ##t## seconds, you work with the interval ##[0, t]##. Either way, you can break the interval into N subintervals and proceed as you did. So, unless I’m overlooking something, it should be clear that the probability of no collision during the preceding ##t## seconds should equal the probability of no collision during the next ##t## seconds.

EE18 said:
(b)
The probability of the event that the time interval between collisions of an electron is ##t## can be argued (It's not clear to me why this should be the same as the probability that a given electron -- not necessarily just collided -- has time ##t## between two of its collisions.) to be the same as the probability of an electron which has just collided colliding again between ##t## and ##t+dt##. But this latter event is precisely the event ##A## that the electron does not collide in ##[0,t]## and ##B## also does collide in ##[t,t+dt)##. ##P(A)## is known from a), while ##P(B) = dt/\tau## from Drude Axiom 4. Thus, by the independence of different time intervals, we have ##P(A\&B) = P(A)P(B) = P_{nc}(t)dt/\tau = e^{-t/\tau}dt/\tau.##
Again, this looks good. I’m not sure I understand your bold-faced concern. For part (b), I don’t see why you are concerned with an electron "not necessarily just collided”.

EE18 said:
For (c), (d), and (e), I am at a bit of a loss.
For part (c) you are picking an arbitrary instant of time which we can call the “present time”. Then, for each electron, there is a time interval ##t## from the present time to the electron’s next collision. The values of ##t## for the different electrons will be distributed with some probability distribution ##P(t)## such that ##P(t)dt## is the probability that the time interval from the present time to the next collision lies between ##t## and ##t+dt##. Using part (a) and using reasoning similar to that used in part (b), you can find an explicit expression for ##P(t)##. Then you can use ##P(t)## to find ##\langle t \rangle##, where ##\langle t \rangle## is the time interval between the present time and the next collision averaged over all the electrons.

Similarly, you can find the average time back to the previous collision.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...

Similar threads

Back
Top