Landau: Explaining the Definition of "Number of States with Energy

Stalafin
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Question about Landau: Definition of "Number of states with energy" in an interval

Hey! I am currently reading Landau's Statistical Physics Part 1, and in Paragraph 7 ("Entropy") I am struggling with a definition.

Right before Equation (7.1) he gives the "required number of states with energy between E and E+\mathrm{d}E" as:
\frac{\mathrm{d}\Gamma(E)}{\mathrm{d}E} \mathrm{d}E

I don't understand this equation. Am I supposed to understand \Gamma(E) as a continuous function, and therefore \frac{\mathrm{d}\Gamma(E)}{\mathrm{d}E} as a derivative?

Furthermore, how is the energy probability distribution
W(E) = \frac{\mathrm{d}\Gamma(E)}{\mathrm{d}E} w(E)
different from w(E). Isn't w(E) kind of a probability distribution by itself?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


For your first question, yes. For the enormous ensembles considered by stat mech (typically 10^23 particles or larger), the number of discrete states approaches infinity so their distribution may be considered continuous.

For the second question, what is w(E)? I don't have access to the text right now...
 


Landau considers that part for a quantum mechanical system. w_n = w(E_n) is the distribution function for the system.

He gets there from the diagonal elements of the density matrix w_n = w_{nn} (since the statistical distributions must be stationary), which can be expressed as functions of the energy levels alone (assuming we have a system in a coordinate system, such that it is at rest and apart from the energy the other integrals of motion don't factor in) w_n=w_(E_n).
 


I think this is the usual distinction discussed in statistics between probability P and probability density function (PDF) p. Here W(E)dE is the probability of seeing the system in a state with energy between E and E+dE. It is given in terms of the product of the PDF w(E) and the number of states d\Gamma(E) in that interval.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In her YouTube video Bell’s Theorem Experiments on Entangled Photons, Dr. Fugate shows how polarization-entangled photons violate Bell’s inequality. In this Insight, I will use quantum information theory to explain why such entangled photon-polarization qubits violate the version of Bell’s inequality due to John Clauser, Michael Horne, Abner Shimony, and Richard Holt known as the...
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
I asked a question related to a table levitating but I am going to try to be specific about my question after one of the forum mentors stated I should make my question more specific (although I'm still not sure why one couldn't have asked if a table levitating is possible according to physics). Specifically, I am interested in knowing how much justification we have for an extreme low probability thermal fluctuation that results in a "miraculous" event compared to, say, a dice roll. Does a...

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
5K
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
19
Views
4K
Back
Top