I Modeling Thermal Equilibrium in Interacting Einstein Solids: A Python Approach

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on modeling the thermal equilibrium of two interacting Einstein solids using Python, emphasizing a discrete time approach. The model proposes that energy packets have a probability of switching between solids, with specific constraints based on the number of oscillators in each solid. There is a debate about whether the switching probability constant, denoted as c, should be the same for both solids, with the conclusion that it is reasonable since it reflects a property of the system. The model must also align with Newton's law of cooling, which it does in the high-temperature limit, even for solids of different sizes. Overall, the approach appears sound, and the model successfully reproduces expected physical behavior.
Isaac0427
Insights Author
Gold Member
Messages
718
Reaction score
163
TL;DR Summary
How can we model the interaction between two Einstein solids within short periods of time?
When I learned about Einstein solids in thermal physics, we assumed the fundamental assumption of statistical mechanics. For two interacting Einstein solids, I completely understand why this is valid after a considerable amount of time has passed. But, how can we model these solids as they get to thermal equilibrium?

I’m thinking of this in terms of python code (I thought doing a model like this would be a fun idea for my semester project in coding), so I’m thinking about discrete time steps as opposed to continuous time.

Here are my thoughts so far:
For each time step, every packet of energy has a probability of switching solids. Within a solid, though, the fundamental assumption is still assumed. The probability of switching from solid a with ##N_a## oscillators to solid b with ##N_b## oscillators would need to be less than or equal to ##\frac{N_b}{N_a+N_b}##. Similarly, the probability of switching from solid b to solid a would need to be less than or equal to ##\frac{N_a}{N_a+N_b}##.

Thus far, how does it sound? To me, assuming the fundamental assumption within the solid seems reasonable even considering time, but is it? I know there is a time it takes heat to travel across an object, but can I assume that this is negligible compared to the time it takes heat to travel within objects?

If my model is ok thus far, my next thought is about what these “switching” probabilities depend on. The easiest thing is that there is some constant ##0\leq c\leq 1##, which is the same for both solids, where the probability of switching from a to b is ##c*\frac{N_b}{N_a+N_b}##, and the probability of switching from b to a is ##c*\frac{N_a}{N_a+N_b}##.

Do you think it is reasonable to assume that c is the same for both solids? I also have argued with myself about temperature dependence (i.e. a given energy packet is more likely to escape from a solid with a lot of energy packets than from a solid with few), but I figured that an individual energy packet does not know or care about how many energy packets are nearby (and not repelling, as with, say, charge). By nature of the way I set this up, there would be a higher chance of SOME energy packet escaping a higher temperature solid, as there are more energy packets compared to oscillators, but the probability for any individual packet is independent of temperature.

I would really appreciate any feedback you can give!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Isaac0427 said:
Do you think it is reasonable to assume that c is the same for both solids?
It has to be, as it is a property of the two objects together.

You'll have to check that your model reproduces Newton's law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_law_of_cooling
 
DrClaude said:
It has to be, as it is a property of the two objects together.

You'll have to check that your model reproduces Newton's law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_law_of_cooling
It definitely checks out in the high temperature limit (##T=\frac{\epsilon q}{Nk}##) with two identical solids. I can't seem to figure out it it works with solids of different sizes.

EDIT: I figured out that in the high temperature limit, it agrees with Newton’s law of cooling for any sized solids. Thank you!
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top