Verifying the Partition Function of the Quantum Harmonic Oscillator

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on verifying the partition function Z for the quantum harmonic oscillator, defined as Z = tr(e^{-\beta H}). The user derived Z using a power series expansion of the exponential operator and applied Schrödinger's equation to express the trace in terms of energy eigenvalues. They arrived at Z = e^{\frac{1}{2}\beta \hbar\omega}/(e^{\beta\hbar\omega}-1) and expressed concern about the correctness of their trace argument. Another participant clarified that both derived forms of Z are equivalent and suggested multiplying the numerator and denominator by e^{\beta \hbar \omega} to confirm the result. The conversation emphasizes the importance of proper handling of exponential traces in quantum mechanics.
unchained1978
Messages
91
Reaction score
0
I've derived Z for the quantum harmonic oscillator and was wondering if anyone could verify I did everything correctly. I don't have any experience working with exponential traces so I want to make sure I'm using them correctly.
Z is defined as \mathcal{Z}= tr(e^{-\beta H}).
So the natural thing to do is write the exponential as a power series e^{-\beta H}=\sum \frac{(-\beta H)^{n}}{n!} and using schrodinger's equation H|\psi\rangle = E |\psi\rangle this gives you e^{-\beta H}|\psi\rangle=\sum \frac{(-\beta E)^{n}}{n!}|\psi\rangle→tr(e^{-\beta H})=\sum_{n} e^{-\beta E_{n}}
Writing out the energy levels this gives e^{-\frac{1}{2}\beta \hbar\omega}\sum_{n} e^{-\beta\hbar\omega n} Which when summed over gives \mathcal{Z}=\frac{e^{\frac{1}{2}\beta \hbar\omega}}{e^{\beta\hbar\omega}-1}
Which is the right result I think. I'm just a bit nervous about the trace argument.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I got
<br /> \frac{e^{-\frac{1}{2}\beta\hbar \omega}}{1-e^{-\beta\hbar\omega}}<br />
also this should be in the Quantum sub-forum, not Classical.
 
Both are equal. Multiply the numerator and denominator by e^{\beta \hbar \omega} to get the first result from the second.
 
Topic about reference frames, center of rotation, postion of origin etc Comoving ref. frame is frame that is attached to moving object, does that mean, in that frame translation and rotation of object is zero, because origin and axes(x,y,z) are fixed to object? Is it same if you place origin of frame at object center of mass or at object tail? What type of comoving frame exist? What is lab frame? If we talk about center of rotation do we always need to specified from what frame we observe?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K