Prove the 3 definitions of entropy are equivalent (stat. mechanics)

Tosh5457
Messages
130
Reaction score
28

Homework Statement



<br /> S(E,V) = kln(\Gamma(E) )\\<br /> S(E,V) = kln(\omega(E) )\\<br /> S(E,V) = kln(\Sigma(E) )\\<br />

S entropy, k Boltzmann's constant. Prove these 3 are equivalent up to an additive constant.

Homework Equations



<br /> \Gamma(E) = \int_{E&lt;H&lt;E+\Delta}^{&#039;}dpdq\\<br /> \Gamma(E)=\omega\Delta \\<br /> \Delta &lt;&lt; E\\<br /> <br /> \Sigma(E) = \int_{H&lt;E}^{&#039;}dpdq\\<br /> \omega = \frac{\partial \Sigma}{\partial E}\\<br />

H is the system's Hamiltonian and E is an arbitrary energy. These are integrations over all the p and q's, I wrote them like that to abbreviate.

The Attempt at a Solution



Using the 1st definition I can get to the 2nd one, but I can't reach at sigma's definition.
<br /> <br /> kln(\Gamma(E)) = kln(\omega\Delta) = kln(\omega) + kln(\Delta)\\<br /> ln(\Delta) &lt;&lt; ln(\omega) =&gt; S = kln(\omega)\\<br />
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm sorry you are not generating any responses at the moment. Is there any additional information you can share with us? Any new findings?
 
I would say ##\Gamma (E)=\Sigma (E+\Delta) -\Sigma (E)=\Delta \frac{\partial \Sigma}{\partial E}+...##
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top