Question with respect to a Max Planck article

Phillip
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
This is not a homework problem, this is a question borne out of self-interest.

I picked up the book "The Dreams that Stuff is Made of" by Stephen Hawking:
(https://www.amazon.com/dp/0762434341/?tag=pfamazon01-20 )

and read the first article by Max Planck: "On the Distribution of Energy in the Normal Spectrum."
(The article can be found here: http://theochem.kuchem.kyoto-u.ac.jp/Ando/planck1901.pdf )

Just reading this article without understanding the formulas is surely not enough and my question is what all of the symbols mean in (3) of the article: SN = k log W + constant

S -> the average entropy of a single resonator
Subscript N -> the set of identical resonators

Now, log W is supposed to denote the probability of a set system of entropy existing if I understood this part correctly. My specific questions are:

What purpose does the k serve in front of log W?
What purpose does the +constant serve?
Why use log W to denote the probability of a set system of entropy existing?

If anyone has read this article, or chooses to do so before responding, could you please point me towards some references that might assist me in understanding probability and the rest of the elements in this formula?

Thank you for your time
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
W is the number of "ways" or elementary configurations the system of resonators can be in (i.e., the number of ways the energy quanta can be distributed among all the N rasonators).

k is Boltzmann's constant. It serves as a constant of proportionality so that the statistical formulation of the entropy and the thermodynamic formulation of the entropy are equivalent.

As far as useful references go, I think pretty much any upper-level undergraduate textbook on statistical mechanics and thermodynamics will cover how to derive the blackbody spectrum. I am particularly partial to Kittel and Kroemer's "Thermal Physics".
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
Thank you very much for your response as I now know where and what to look for in my university library. I checked the reference website and we have this text by Kittel and Kroemer. Thank you once again for the response.
 
We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following; https://www.cambridge.org/engage/api-gateway/coe/assets/orp/resource/item/66a6a6005101a2ffa86cdd48/original/a-derivation-of-maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf 'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s...
I read Hanbury Brown and Twiss's experiment is using one beam but split into two to test their correlation. It said the traditional correlation test were using two beams........ This confused me, sorry. All the correlation tests I learnt such as Stern-Gerlash are using one beam? (Sorry if I am wrong) I was also told traditional interferometers are concerning about amplitude but Hanbury Brown and Twiss were concerning about intensity? Isn't the square of amplitude is the intensity? Please...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Back
Top