Volume elements of phase space

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the derivation of the continuity equation for probability density in phase space, specifically examining the term involving the volume element, ##\mathrm{d} \Gamma##. The author questions the necessity of differentiating ##\mathrm{d} \Gamma## in the context of the Leibniz integral rule and seeks clarity on its mathematical nature. The alternative derivation presented confirms that the infinitesimal volume element remains constant over time, leading to the conclusion that the probability density, ##\rho##, is conserved along particle trajectories, ultimately resulting in the continuity equation: $$0 = \partial_t \rho + (\nabla \rho) \cdot \boldsymbol{v}$$.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of probability density functions in statistical mechanics.
  • Familiarity with phase space concepts and volume elements.
  • Knowledge of Liouville's theorem and its implications in classical mechanics.
  • Proficiency in calculus, particularly the Leibniz integral rule and Jacobian transformations.
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the implications of Liouville's theorem in statistical mechanics.
  • Study the derivation and applications of the continuity equation in fluid dynamics.
  • Investigate the role of probability density in thermodynamic systems.
  • Learn about Jacobian transformations and their significance in phase space analysis.
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, mathematicians, and students studying statistical mechanics, particularly those interested in the mathematical foundations of phase space and probability density functions.

terra
Messages
27
Reaction score
2
First, two definitions: let ## \varrho (M)## be the probability density of macro states ##M ## (which correspond to a subgroup of the phase space) and ## \mathrm{d} \Gamma ## be the volume element of a phase space.
In my lecture notes, the derivation for continuity equation of probability density starts with:
$$ \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t} \int \mathrm{d} \Gamma \, \varrho= \int \frac{ \bar{n} \cdot \bar{v} \mathrm{d}A \, \mathrm{d}t}{\mathrm{d}t} \varrho + \int \mathrm{d} \Gamma \, \partial_t \varrho ,$$
where the first term on right hand side is supposed to be the time-derivative of the volume element in phase space.
This step bothers me. Why do we also take the derivative of ## \boldsymbol{ \mathrm{d} \Gamma} ## - are these not usually ignored (see, for instance, Leibniz integral rule for taking a derivative inside an integral)? What kind of a mathematical object is ## \boldsymbol{\mathrm{d} \Gamma}##?
 
Last edited:
I do have some updates on this problem.
I'm still not convinced with the above derivation. Maybe it works with some explanation, but I prefer something mathematically more straight-forward.
However, I did find an alternative derivation, which, to my mind, goes more smoothly.
As a reminder, we wish to get a continuity equation for ##\rho ##. Actually, we'll find Liouville's theorem at the same time.
Firstly, we need to show that ## \mathrm{d}/\mathrm{d}t \, \mathrm{d} \Gamma = 0## i.e. that a infinitesimal volume element in phase space does not change in volume. This appears to hold approximately.
During a small time ##\mathrm{d}t##: ## x(0) \to x(0) + \dot{x}(0) \mathrm{d}t ##, so that ## \mathrm{d}x(t) = \mathrm{d}x(0) + \partial \dot{x}(0)/\partial x(0) \mathrm{d}t##. Thus, (after a short calculation, which is easiest to perform writing out the Jacobian of the 'coordinate transformation'), ##\prod_i \mathrm{d}q_i(t) \mathrm{d}p_i(t)= \prod_i \mathrm{d}q_i(0) \mathrm{d}p_i(0) + \mathcal{O} \mathrm{d}t^2##, but as we expanded up to linear order in the first place, we drop the ## \mathrm{d}t^2##-term.
Thus, the infinitesimal volume element stays constant in time.

There is still something that bothers me in the next part. We want to argue that ## \mathrm{d}/\mathrm{d}t \, \mathrm{d} \Gamma \, \rho= 0 ##. We remember that the trajectories ## q_i ## and ## p_i ## follow ##i##:th particle (and so on). Let's follow the density along the trajectories of some particles. My cognitive problem is that in general, I've understood that ##\rho## is the probability to find the system from some macrostate. Say, you start from an initial state where the particles are close together and define your macro state as the volume that particles take, and set the particles free. I would definitely expect a higher volume becoming more probable as time goes on.
Then again, in some contexts, ## \rho## is taken to be the particle density and the probability to find particles from phase space is normalised to ## N##. Then, if I follow the trajectories of some ##n## particles weighed with probability density, it is intuitive that the probability density along those paths stays constant, because we always find the same number of particles in that (deforming) volume of phase space.
If someone is able to clarify this, I would be happy (or I'll come back to it when I understand it better). It's funny how physicists in general don't define the probability density in a clear way (read: at all).

After asserting the above, we are practically done. We note that ## \rho= \rho(t,...,q_i,...,p_i,...)##. Thus $$ 0= \frac{\mathrm{d}\rho}{\mathrm{d}t} = \partial_t \rho + \frac{ \partial \rho }{ \partial q_i } \dot{q}_i + \frac{ \partial \rho }{ \partial p_i } \dot{p}_i $$ (sum over ##i##), and denoting ##\boldsymbol{v}= (\dot{\boldsymbol{q}},-\dot{\boldsymbol{p}}) ##
$$ 0 = \partial_t \rho +( \nabla \rho ) \cdot \boldsymbol{v}$$
which is the continuity equation, since in this case ## \nabla \cdot \boldsymbol{v}= 0 ## so that ## \nabla \cdot (\rho \boldsymbol{v})= (\nabla \rho) \cdot \boldsymbol{v} ##.
 
Possibly a last update. I think this problem is pretty much solved (or, well, solved in an alternative way). I still couldn't see ##\mathrm{d}/\mathrm{d}t \, \mathrm{d}\Gamma \, \rho= 0## from any equations. But, as the last messages show, I was confused about the definition of the probability distribution. After some googling and thinking I realized that in any case ##\rho= \rho(t,\boldsymbol{q},\boldsymbol{p})## gives a weight to each trajectory ##(\boldsymbol{q}_i,\boldsymbol{p}_i)## in phase space. (It's only after one maximises entropy with boundary conditions that one arrives at ##\rho## as a function of some macroscopic variables.) And as such, if there are no particles created or destroyed, and we follow some trajectories (of some particles) during a time-interval, the particles should maintain the same weights.

My only 'problem' with this is that to me, it still feels like we 'assume' the difficult part of a result, the rest is just 'trivial' algebra, and still we call it a result.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
46
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
1K