How Are the Failures of Equipartition Theory Linked to Quantum Mechanics?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter neelakash
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion explores the failures of equipartition theory in relation to quantum mechanics, specifically addressing its implications for the specific heat of gases and the Rayleigh-Jeans radiation law. Participants examine the theoretical underpinnings and experimental discrepancies associated with these concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that the law of equipartition of energy suggests specific heat should be independent of temperature, which contradicts experimental findings.
  • One participant connects the failures of equipartition theory to the Rayleigh-Jeans radiation law, indicating both are in disagreement with experimental results.
  • Another participant proposes that the failures stem from the quantization of energy states, suggesting that the Rayleigh-Jeans law can be derived from considering a blackbody as an infinite square well and the behavior of bosons.
  • A claim is made that classical mechanics predicts a specific heat of 6/2 kB, which should not depend on temperature, but quantum mechanics alters this expectation due to changes in how angular momentum contributes to kinetic energy.
  • It is suggested that while classical angular momentum contributions are proportional to temperature, quantum mechanical contributions may follow a different relationship, possibly proportional to T^4, leading to a T^3 dependence for specific heat.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between equipartition theory failures and quantum mechanics, with no consensus reached on the exact nature of these connections or the implications for specific heat and radiation laws.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of missing details regarding the specific forms of energy contributions in quantum mechanics and how they differ from classical assumptions, as well as unresolved mathematical relationships that could clarify the discussion.

neelakash
Messages
491
Reaction score
1
The law of equipartion of energy requires that specific heat of gases be independent of the temperature,in disagreement with the experiments.It also leads to Rayleigh-Jeans radiation law,which is also in disagreement with the experiment.What is the relation between the two failures?

What I understand,in both cases,we must take the [tex]\ h[/tex][tex]\nu[/tex][tex]\frac{1}{e^(h\nu/kT)-1}[/tex] whereas the classical equipartition theory assumes kT
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Plesae bear with the bad LaTeX output.
 
Hey, no one interested!
 
I'm not an expert on the subject, but from what I understand, both failures are due to quantization of energy states. The Rayleigh-Jeans law, if I remember correctly, can be derived by realizing that the inside of a blackbody is like an infinite square well and taking into account rules about how an ensemble of bosons behaves.

An ideal gas should have a specific heat of 6/2 kB classically speaking, and this shouldn't be dependent on temperature. The reason is that the average of something that contributes quadratically to the total energy (i.e., [tex]1/2 m v^2_x[/tex], [tex]1/2 I \omega^2[/tex], [tex]1/2 k x^2[/tex], etc.) is always 1/2 kB T. However, in quantum mechanics, the angular momentum contribution to the kinetic energy no longer has the form specified above. I forget what the form is exactly, it's somewhat complicated, but the important part is that, while the average of the classical angular momentum contribution is proportional to T, the average of the quantum mechanical angular momentum contribution is proportional to something else, probably T^4 (yielding a T^3 dependence for the specific heat).

So, to sum it all up, the quantization of energy states in an infinite square well is responsible for the Rayleigh-Jeans law, and the quantization of angular momentum is responsible for the temperature dependence of the specific heat.
 
I thank you for your reply.But it would be better if you clarify your write up a bit more.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
539
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K