Harmonic Potentials and energy state populations

AI Thread Summary
For a potential energy surface with two minima, A and B, the discussion focuses on determining the relationship between the force constants kA and kB to establish when the higher energy state B becomes more probable at temperature T. The key question is how small kB must be relative to kA for state B to be favored. The lack of responses indicates a need for clarification or deeper exploration of the topic. The inquiry emphasizes the importance of understanding harmonic potentials in statistical mechanics. Engaging with this concept can provide insights into energy state populations in thermodynamic systems.
DanPhysChem
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hi All - Let's say I have a potential energy surface with two minima, one higher than the other. We will label the higher minima B and the lower minima A. Each potential well can be approximated as a harmonic potential with force constants kA and kB for wells A and B respectively. How small must kB be in terms of kA in order for that state (higher energy) to be the more likely state at temperature T?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sry to bump my own thread. I'm really dying on this one here, any help is much appreciated.
 
Is anyone out there? I've yet to get a response to anything I've posted on this site :-(
 

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
View full post »
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
View full post »

Similar threads

I Change of coordinates in a potential energy field
Replies
2
Views
1K
I Doubt on Morse potential and harmonic oscillator
Replies
2
Views
2K
Harmonic potential exercise with perturbation theory
Replies
2
Views
2K
Potential Energy and Potential -- Systems versus Particles
Replies
6
Views
11K
Conservative forces, Nonconservative forces and Potential Energy
Replies
9
Views
3K
I Sachs-Wolfe effect and Superclusters/Supervoids
Replies
7
Views
2K
How to understand potential energy in Lagrangian
Replies
2
Views
1K
Partition Function: Energy States & Force Constants
Replies
1
Views
2K
I Energies of bound state for delta function potential
Replies
2
Views
1K
I I would like an explanation of these extra energy states
Replies
3
Views
749

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top