What Is the Mathematical Definition of the Microcanonical Partition Function?

AI Thread Summary
The microcanonical partition function is mathematically defined as the integral of phase space volume constrained by energy, represented as Ω = {E_0/N!h^{3n}}∫ d^{3N}q d^{3N}p δ(H - E), where H is the Hamiltonian. It serves as a count of states under extensive constraints like volume and energy, with each state's probability being uniform across the phase space volume. In classical systems, the number of states is uncountable due to continuous position and momentum variables. The discussion highlights the importance of understanding the constant energy surface in phase space for calculating the partition function. This foundational concept is crucial for statistical mechanics and thermodynamics.
Pacopag
Messages
193
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement


Does anyone know the mathematical definition of the microcanonical partition function?
I've seen
\Omega = {E_0\over{N!h^{3n}}}\int d^{3N}q d^{3N}p \delta(H - E)
where H=H(p,q) is the Hamiltonian. This looks like a useful definition.
Only thing is I don't know what E_0 is.

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution

 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The microcanonical partition function is just a count of the number of states that satisfy extensive constraints on volume, energy, etc. The probability of each state is then trivially one over the partition function.
 
But in the case of a classical system the number of states is uncountable because the position and momenta are continuous.
 
In which case you can still calculate the phase space volume and the probability distribution is uniform over that volume --- it's the obvious generalisation.
 
Ok. Good. Now I see why my "hint" was to bring the constant energy surface in phase space into a sphere (because I know how to find the volume of a sphere).

Thank you very much genneth.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top