A I'm trying to follow the proof given in Box 5.3 of MCP (Thorne/Blandford)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on a proof from Box 5.3 of the MCP book concerning the Van der Waals grand potential. A participant initially believes there is a missing factor in Equation (8) but is corrected by another member who clarifies that the terms should be (2l)! instead of l!. A high-quality image of the relevant page is provided for reference, although the initial scan was of poor quality. The final line of Equation (8) is confirmed to be correct as presented in the book. The clarification resolves the confusion regarding the proof's accuracy.
jouvelot
Messages
51
Reaction score
2
I'm trying to follow the proof given in Box 5.3, page 235, of the MCP book regarding the Van der Waals grand potential. It seems to me that there is a missing factor (2l−1)!/(l−1)! in the last term of Equation (8). What am I doing wrong?
 
Science news on Phys.org
Can you post a high-quality scan image of that box? Use the "Attach files" link below the edit window to upload the image. Thanks.
 
Thanks @berkeman

Here is the page you requested (the attached version seems to be of rather poor quality). I don't think the previous page is needed, but if you think it could be useful, please let me know.
The original, good quality image is available at https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ep2xqpo5ko9ybdancd33f/20240401_185542.jpg?rlkey=gnsw4ftd8ou2ea8konhgh6mn9&dl=0.

20240401_185542.jpg
 
1711998694491.png


The circled ##l!## terms should each be ##(2l)!##. The final line of (8), as given in the book, is correct.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes jouvelot and berkeman
TSny said:
View attachment 342684

The circled ##l!## terms should each be ##(2l)!##. The final line of (8), as given in the book, is correct.
Ah, this makes a lot of sense, indeed. I was expecting Line 8 to be correct, since the rest of the proof follows through with this value, but couldn't find the error. Thanks a lot, @TSny, for spotting the error before that.
 

Similar threads

Replies
48
Views
11K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
38
Views
46K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Back
Top