How Does This Quantum Mechanics Approximation Problem Work?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Narcol2000
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Approximation
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on understanding the approximation of the expression e^{-\hbar \omega / 2k_BT} / (1 - e^{-\hbar \omega / k_BT}) to k_BT / \hbar\omega when T is significantly greater than \hbar\omega/k_B. The user initially struggles with the derivation but finds success using Taylor expansions, particularly for small values of x. They confirm that their method aligns with established limits in calculus, leading to the desired result. The conversation highlights the validity of the Taylor expansion approach while also appreciating the clarity of alternative explanations. Ultimately, the approximation is validated through mathematical reasoning.
Narcol2000
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
I'm having problems understanding how

<br /> \frac{e^{-\hbar \omega / 2k_BT}}{1-e^{-\hbar \omega / k_BT}}<br />

approximates to

<br /> k_BT/ \hbar\omega<br />
when

<br /> T &gt;&gt; \hbar\omega/k_B<br />

Seems like it should be simple but don't quite see how to arrive at this result.

*update*

I have tried using taylor expansions of exp(-x) and 1-exp(-x) and just using the first expansion term since if T&gt;&gt;\hbar\omega/k_B then \hbar\omega/k_BT should be small. This seems to give the right answer but i'd be interested in knowing if indeed my method is ok and if there are alternate methods.
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
If you call
x = - {{\hbar \omega } \over {2 k_B T}}
(and x \to 0 when T &gt;&gt; \hbar\omega/k_B)

then your expression is equivalent to
{{e^x } \over {1 - e^{2x} }}

Utilizing the known limit
\mathop {\lim }\limits_{x \to 0} {{e^x -1} \over x} = 1

you can write
<br /> \mathop {\lim }\limits_{x \to 0} {{e^x } \over {1 - e^{2x} }} = \mathop {\lim }\limits_{x \to 0} {{e^x } \over {\left( {1 - e^x } \right)\left( {1 + e^x } \right)}}\left( {{{e^x - 1 } \over x}} \right) \to -{1 \over {2x}}

So the expression near zero goes like
-{1 \over {2x}}
that means that the original expression goes like
{{k_B T} \over {\hbar \omega }}
 
Thanks, the way i did it was equivalent it seems, but yours was a lot more clearer..

thanks again.
 
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top