What Happens to Boson Distribution in Long-Lived Non-Equilibrium States?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the behavior of bosons in a confined space, particularly focusing on their distribution in long-lived non-equilibrium states. Participants explore concepts from statistical mechanics, the implications of bosonic behavior, and the conditions under which certain configurations may persist over time.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that in a box containing a large number of bosons, it is equally probable to find any distribution of bosons, but questions arise about the validity of this assumption.
  • Another participant challenges the idea of equiprobable states, arguing that the probability of bosons occupying certain states is influenced by the presence of many other states and interactions.
  • Questions are raised about the nature of interactions between bosons and whether these interactions were considered in the original thought experiment.
  • A participant emphasizes the role of temperature, stating that at finite temperatures, bosons tend to occupy a range of states rather than clustering in one area, countering the idea of a static configuration.
  • Discussion includes the concept of Bose-Einstein condensation and its relation to temperature, with one participant noting that such condensation occurs at absolute zero.
  • Another participant mentions that long-lived non-equilibrium states can decay into more probable configurations, but this process may require a significant number of bosons to change states simultaneously.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the probability of boson distributions and the effects of temperature and interactions. There is no consensus on whether the initial assumptions about equiprobable states hold true, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these factors on boson behavior.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the potential neglect of interactions between bosons and the dependence of conclusions on temperature conditions. The discussion also highlights the complexity of defining microstates and macrostates in the context of bosonic systems.

Boltzmann2012
Messages
30
Reaction score
0
Hi guys,
Let us consider this thought experiment of having say Avogadro number of bosons in a box. According to statistical mechanics, it is equally probable to find every distribution of bosons in the box.
But, say we wait really long enough to find that at one point of time, we find all the bosons on one side of the box. Now, bosons as they are, have the feature that the probability of finding n of them in a state, is proportional to n+1. Hence even if we add one more boson to the box, it would most probably join the other bosons and still maintain the previous configuration.
Now, we can see that by adding more and more bosons, instead of getting more distributed, the particles are maintaining the configuration. Is there something wrong with my logic or is this what happens with bosons?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
According to statistical mechanics, it is equally probable to find every distribution of bosons in the box.
It is not.

Now, we can see that by adding more and more bosons, instead of getting more distributed, the particles are maintaining the configuration.
n+1 is just a relative probability, and you have many other states - compared to a single one with your bosons inside. Most bosons will get a different state, unless you cool them significantly to reduce the number of available states.
 
Could you explain why the states are not equiprobable?

Also, is there any interaction between the bosons which we are missing out here?
 
Boltzmann2012 said:
Could you explain why the states are not equiprobable?
It is a result of a calculation, I don't know if there is an intuitive way to explain it.
Also, is there any interaction between the bosons which we are missing out here?
I would expect that this interaction was neglected in your setup.
 
"Bosons in a box", there's a jingle out there waiting to be written with that title.

I have not studied that much QM, but the "boson in a box" system sounds very unspecific.
Energy will be quantized in the box, but what superposition of these states?
Also why do you claim that all distributions are equally probable?
 
Thank you all very much for replying. Let me make my question more specific
There are N bosons in a box which are at a sufficiently low temperature so that the entire box exists at a specific constant energy. According to statistical mechanics, for such a distribution of bosons, it will happen(very unlikely, but IS PROBABLE)that all of the bosons occupy one half of the box and the other half is empty at some time.
Now, if at the very next instant we start adding one boson at a time, then according to the probability condition of bosonic behaviour, it is more probable that the newly incoming boson would get into the fuller side of the box. My question is that is this configuration possible and if yes wouldn't this imply that our box now would be in this static situation of one side full and the other side empty for ever?
 
What you're describing is Bose-Einstein condensation, and you're arguing that it will always happen. Well it will always happen - at absolute zero!

What you're neglecting is the effect of temperature. You need to remember that a single macrostate such as "the left side of the room" consists of many microstates, and the most probable configuration will occur when the particles are spread uniformly over the microstates. Even for bosons. At a finite temperature, this overcomes the tendency for bosons to want to occupy the same state.
 
In principle that is what is happening in a superfluid or superconductor. Once you have created a state with a nonvanishing current, it won't decay although states being energetically vavourable (i.e. those with vanishing current) are available.
 
OMG, so all this time, was I simply describing the BEC? Anyway, one more doubt, does the probability rule hold only at 0 K?
 
  • #10
The point is that you are talking about very long lived non-equilibrium states. They can decay into something more probable, but their livetime is very long as this requires a whole fraction of all bosons to change state simultaneously.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 143 ·
5
Replies
143
Views
12K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K