Integrating Maxwell Boltzmann Distribution in One Dimension

Kara386
Messages
204
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


I need to integrate
##\langle |v_x| \rangle = \int^{\infty}_0 |v_x| \sqrt{\frac{m}{2\pi kT}}e^{-mv_x^2/2kT}dv##
For context this is a Maxwell Boltzmann distribution in one dimension, and I've actually been asked to calculate ##\langle v_x \rangle## which is given by ##|v_x|f(v)## where ##f(v) = \sqrt{\frac{m}{2\pi kT}}e^{-mv_x^2/2kT}## is the Maxwell Boltzmann distribution in the x-direction. Not sure if the question is best put in physics or maths.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I'm a little confused because since ##v_x## is always positive between infinity and zero (I think?) the integral is actually just ##\langle v_x \rangle##, since the mod can be ignored if it's always positive. That can't be it though, I've already been asked to calculate ##\langle v_x \rangle## in the first part of the same question. So I suppose my treatment of the mod must be wrong.

Thanks for any help!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Kara386 said:

Homework Statement


I need to integrate
##\langle |v_x| \rangle = \int^{\infty}_0 |v_x| \sqrt{\frac{m}{2\pi kT}}e^{-mv_x^2/2kT}dv##
For context this is a Maxwell Boltzmann distribution in one dimension, and I've actually been asked to calculate ##\langle v_x \rangle## which is given by ##|v_x|f(v)## where ##f(v) = \sqrt{\frac{m}{2\pi kT}}e^{-mv_x^2/2kT}## is the Maxwell Boltzmann distribution in the x-direction. Not sure if the question is best put in physics or maths.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I'm a little confused because since ##v_x## is always positive between infinity and zero (I think?) the integral is actually just ##\langle v_x \rangle##, since the mod can be ignored if it's always positive. That can't be it though, I've already been asked to calculate ##\langle v_x \rangle## in the first part of the same question. So I suppose my treatment of the mod must be wrong.

Thanks for any help!

What was your result for ##\langle v_x \rangle##?

Do you see why ##\langle v_x \rangle \neq \langle |v_x| \rangle##?

What slight (but important) error have you made in your expression for ## \langle |v_x| \rangle##?
 
  • Like
Likes Kara386
Ray Vickson said:
What was your result for ##\langle v_x \rangle##?

Do you see why ##\langle v_x \rangle \neq \langle |v_x| \rangle##?

What slight (but important) error have you made in your expression for ## \langle |v_x| \rangle##?
Is the error related to the limits, by any chance? Should probably go to ##-\infty## and that would explain a lot.
 
Last edited:
Kara386 said:
Is the error related to the limits, by any chance? Should probably go to ##-\infty## and that would explain a lot.

Try it, to see what you get.

Anyway, what is your answer to my question about ##\langle v_x \rangle##?
 
  • Like
Likes Kara386
Ray Vickson said:
Try it, to see what you get.

Anyway, what is your answer to my question about ##\langle v_x \rangle##?
It is the limits, velocity can be negative, I'd been working with speed in 3D so only needed to integrate ##\infty## to zero. Didn't read the question carefully so missed that we had moved to velocity distribution. As to ##\langle v_x \rangle##, I have that equal to zero.
 
Kara386 said:
It is the limits, velocity can be negative, I'd been working with speed in 3D so only needed to integrate ##\infty## to zero. Didn't read the question carefully so missed that we had moved to velocity distribution. As to ##\langle v_x \rangle##, I have that equal to zero.

Right: ##\langle v_x \rangle = 0##, and this follows immediately (with essentially no work) from the fact that ##f(v_x)## is an even function of ##v_x##, so ##v_x f(v_x)## is an odd function. In contrast, ##|v_x| f(v_x)## is an even function of ##v_x##, so its integral over the whole line can be easily related to its integral over the half-line ##\{ v_x \geq 0 \}##.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...

Similar threads

Back
Top