Low Temp Limit: Paramagnet v. Einstein solid

AI Thread Summary
The low-temperature limits of paramagnets and Einstein solids can be expressed through similar equations, Ω=(Ne/Ndown)Ndown for paramagnets and Ω=(Ne/q)q for Einstein solids. Both systems adhere to a binomial distribution, where particles are either in the desired state or not, leading to factorial considerations. In large particle limits, Stirling's approximation allows for simplification of these equations. Despite the difference in energy levels—paramagnets having two and Einstein solids having infinite—the underlying statistical mechanics principles remain consistent. This connection highlights the fundamental similarities in their behavior at low temperatures.
Geronimo23
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hey everyone! So I have that the low temperature limit of a paramagnet is Ω=(Ne/Ndown)Ndown while the low temperature limit of an einstein solid is Ω=(Ne/q)q. How could I explain that these two equations are essentially the same considering their respective limits (Ndown<<N and q<<N) and that oscillators in an einstein solid have an infinite number of energy levels while paramagnets have only two? Thank you so much!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Geronimo23 said:
Hey everyone! So I have that the low temperature limit of a paramagnet is Ω=(Ne/Ndown)Ndown while the low temperature limit of an einstein solid is Ω=(Ne/q)q. How could I explain that these two equations are essentially the same considering their respective limits (Ndown<<N and q<<N) and that oscillators in an einstein solid have an infinite number of energy levels while paramagnets have only two? Thank you so much!
Both the paramagentic material and the Einstein solid follow the binomial distribution, as any particle is either in the state of interest or is not, and so deal with factorials. In the limit of large numbers of particles, Stirling's approximation ##(N!=N\ln(N)-N)## can be applied and rearranged for that form.
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top