Understanding the Six Degrees of Freedom in Crystal Structures

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of degrees of freedom in crystal structures, specifically addressing the confusion between the three degrees of freedom typically attributed to atomic vibrations and the six degrees of freedom that include both kinetic and potential energy components. It clarifies that while each atom has three translational degrees of freedom, the harmonic oscillator model introduces additional degrees of freedom related to kinetic and potential energies, leading to a total of six. The equipartition principle is examined, highlighting that each degree of freedom contributes equally to the system's energy, which can be misunderstood when considering one-dimensional oscillators. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding both kinetic and potential energy contributions to grasp the full complexity of degrees of freedom in crystal structures. Overall, the clarification of these concepts aids in a deeper understanding of thermal properties in materials.
Zarquon
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
It seems to me that there should only be three degrees of freedom for each atom in a crystal, one for each direction of vibration; but apparently there are six? Can someone explain?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you referring to the heat capacity being 3Nk in the high temperature limit?
That's not that there are 3 degrees of freedom but 3 harmonic oscillators per atom, each having a heat capacity of k. As a mnemonic one sometimes says that there is one degree of freedom for kinetic and potential energy in an oscillator.
 
Thanks, that clarifies things a bit! But now I'm a bit confused with the equipartition principle: according to what I've been told, a degree of freedom is the same as an independent variable that contributes an amount to the energy proportional to its square, and each degree of freedom contributes 1/2 k T to the mean energy. So according to this a 1-dimensional harmonic oscillator only has one degree of freedom? (That is, its energy is proportional to the square of its amplitude)
 
Last edited:
I would have to think about seriously to give you details, but maybe you want to work this out yourself. The point is that the equipartition theorem is a theorem from classical statistical mechanics. Hence you have to consider the degrees of freedom in phase space.
 
Zarquon said:
Thanks, that clarifies things a bit! But now I'm a bit confused with the equipartition principle: according to what I've been told, a degree of freedom is the same as an independent variable that contributes an amount to the energy proportional to its square, and each degree of freedom contributes 1/2 k T to the mean energy. So according to this a 1-dimensional harmonic oscillator only has one degree of freedom? (That is, its energy is proportional to the square of its amplitude)

The total energy of the 1-D harmonic oscillator is proportional to the square of the amplitude. However, the amplitude is the maximum displacement of the harmonic oscillator.

At any specific time, the square of the displacement is less than or equal to the square of the amplitude. This "less than or equal to" means there is a degree of freedom in the displacement.

The total energy of the harmonic oscillator is constant in time when there is no damping. However, at any moment of time the total energy has two components. The total energy is the sum of the kinetic energy and the potential energy. The ratio of kinetic energy to total energy changes with time.

Therefore, there are actually two degrees of freedom. There is a degree of freedom corresponding to the kinetic energy. There is a degree of freedom corresponding to the potential energy.

Suppose you have a harmonic oscillator of known frequency. At any moment of time, the amplitude can be calculated only by knowing BOTH the kinetic energy and the potential energy.

There is no way to determine the amplitude from the potential energy alone because the potential energy is proportional to the square of the instantaneous displacement. There is no way to determine the amplitude from the kinetic energy because the kinetic energy is proportional to the square of the velocity. One can determine the amplitude knowing both the kinetic energy and the potential energy at anyone time. Therefore, there are two degrees of freedom.

Amplitude is not just the displacement. Amplitude is the maximum displacement. Any displacement less than maximum is not the amplitude.
 
Alright, it's beginning to make sense to me now. Thanks a lot, guys!
 
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