Small deviations from equilibrium and Lagrange multipliers

Ted Ali
Messages
11
Reaction score
1
Homework Statement
Consider the grand canonical ensemble, for a system A with N identical particles. This system can exchange particles with a reservoir A'. We consider only small deviations from equilibrium. What is the necessary and sufficient condition that the Lagrange multiplier ##\alpha## of N, must satisfy?
Relevant Equations
The Lagrange multiplier ##\alpha## is: $$\alpha =\left( \frac{\partial \ln \Omega}{\partial N'} \right)$$.
According to the book "Principles of Statistical Mechanics" by Amnon Katz, page 123, ##\alpha## must be such that ##\exp ( -\alpha N ) ## can be expanded in powers of ##\alpha## with only the first order term kept. Is this the necessary and sufficient condition for small deviations from equilibrium?

Thank you in advance,
Ted.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello Ted.

Looking through your expressions, I guess that you are using the same notation of the book ("Principles of Statistical Mechanics" by Amnon Katz).

Two points:

What is the expression of your statistical functions ##f##'s?
I assume that it should be something like this for system ##A##,

$$f=\exp(\Omega\ +\ \alpha N )\ ,$$
right? (please correct me if I am wrong).

May you elaborate on how you obtained the Lagrange multiplayer ##\alpha##? If your derivation is correct, then you have the necessary condition.
 
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