Statistical Mechanics: Ideal Gas of Oxygen Atoms in Equilibrium

anon134
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Consider an ideal gas of oxygen atoms in equilibrium with oxygen atoms absorbed on a planar surface. here are N_s sites per unit surface area at which the atoms can be absorbed, and the energy of an absorbed atom is -e compared to one in the free state. The system is under 1 atm and at 300K.

Should the atoms be described by classical statistics or quantum statistics? I need to show this qualitatively and here's what I have:

\frac{1}{e^{(\epsilon-\mu)/kT} \pm 1}
In the classical limit, \epsilon-\mu&gt;&gt;kT[/tex]<br /> <br /> But we do not know what e is, or mu. Not sure where to go from here, any hints physics forums?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your equation encompasses both Fermi-Dirac and Bose-Einstein statistics because you have a +/- sign in there. Look up both Fermi-Dirac and Bose-Einstein statistics to find out the differences.
 
badphysicist said:
Your equation encompasses both Fermi-Dirac and Bose-Einstein statistics because you have a +/- sign in there. Look up both Fermi-Dirac and Bose-Einstein statistics to find out the differences.

Exactly, since quantum statistics becomes Boltzmann maxwell statistics at the classical limit, so I have the +/- for generality. Thus, regardless of a BE or FD distribution, taking the classical limit will give back classical stat.

Now, the question is, do I use classical statmech or quantum statmech for this problem?
 
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