Fundamental relationship between thermodynamics and stat. mechanics

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between entropy and the number of microstates in statistical mechanics and thermodynamics. Participants explore the assumptions underlying the correspondence between entropy (S) and the number of microstates (Ω), particularly in the context of two statistically independent systems.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant references Greiner's work, stating that for two independent systems, the total number of microstates is the product of the individual systems, leading to the conclusion that entropy is extensive and additive.
  • Another participant questions the assumption of a one-to-one correspondence between entropy and microstates, expressing a desire for a demonstration or justification of this relationship.
  • A different participant acknowledges the assumption but seeks clarification on whether it is supported by experimental results or if there exists a formal demonstration of the bijective correspondence between S and Ω.
  • One participant suggests that deriving the statistical entropy from the logarithm of the number of microstates can show that it behaves similarly to thermodynamic entropy, though they note that counting states properly involves subtle points.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express uncertainty regarding the justification of the correspondence between entropy and microstates. While some accept the assumption, others seek further clarification or formal justification, indicating that multiple views remain on this topic.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of demonstrating the relationship between S and Ω, noting that the assumption may not be straightforward and could depend on specific definitions or contexts.

Daaavde
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
From the Greiner (Thermodynamics and statistical mechanics) on the relationship between the number of microstates of two systems and the total entropy:



...for two statistically independent systems the total number of compatible microstates [itex]\Omega_{tot}[/itex] is obviously the product of the numbers for the individual systems, namely [itex]\Omega_{tot} = \Omega_1 \Omega_2[/itex]. We have seen the entropy is an extensive quantity which is simply added for both partial systems: [itex]S_{tot} = S_1 + S_2[/itex].
If we now assume that there is a one-to-one correspondence between entropy and [itex]\Omega[/itex], for instance [itex]S = f(\Omega)[/itex], there is only one mathematical function which simultaneously fulfills [itex]S_{tot} = S_1 + S_2[/itex] and [itex]\Omega_{tot} = \Omega_1 \Omega_2[/itex]: the logarithm. Therefore it must hold that [itex]S \propto ln \Omega[/itex]...




Now, in this case, the one-to-one correspondence between [itex]S[/itex] and [itex]\Omega[/itex] is not obvious to me at all. I was searching for a demonstration, or at least some more convincing justification, but i found nothing.

Can anyone help me with this?
 
Science news on Phys.org
Daaavde said:
From the Greiner (Thermodynamics and statistical mechanics) on the relationship between the number of microstates of two systems and the total entropy:



...for two statistically independent systems the total number of compatible microstates [itex]\Omega_{tot}[/itex] is obviously the product of the numbers for the individual systems, namely [itex]\Omega_{tot} = \Omega_1 \Omega_2[/itex]. We have seen the entropy is an extensive quantity which is simply added for both partial systems: [itex]S_{tot} = S_1 + S_2[/itex].
If we now assume that there is a one-to-one correspondence between entropy and [itex]\Omega[/itex], for instance [itex]S = f(\Omega)[/itex], there is only one mathematical function which simultaneously fulfills [itex]S_{tot} = S_1 + S_2[/itex] and [itex]\Omega_{tot} = \Omega_1 \Omega_2[/itex]: the logarithm. Therefore it must hold that [itex]S \propto ln \Omega[/itex]...




Now, in this case, the one-to-one correspondence between [itex]S[/itex] and [itex]\Omega[/itex] is not obvious to me at all. I was searching for a demonstration, or at least some more convincing justification, but i found nothing.

Can anyone help me with this?
The one-to-one correspondence is just an assumption. It is not obvious so they just ask you to assume it. It took Boltzmann years to develop the relationship between entropy and Ω, so don't feel bad if you are having difficulty seeing the connection.

AM
 
I would be ok with the ansatz (it's not the first time I've to deal with it of course) but my doubt is:

The assumption is just confirmed by experimental result (hence we're like "yeah, data are fitting so Boltzmann is right, let's leave it like this") or there is a formal demonstration about the bijective correspondence S-Ω (i hope so) which maybe is too complicated (or too abstract) for the Greiner to put in the book.

I don't necessarily need the demonstration (though I would really like to give it a look), I would just like to know if the assumption is somewhere formally justified or not.
 
One way to show it is to derive that the quantity defined by

$$
S_{stat} = k_B \ln \Omega
$$

behaves in the same way as the thermodynamic entropy ##S##. Some subtle points are encountered, like how to count number of states properly but the simple version is given in many textbooks on statistical physics.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K