Which Method to Use for Evaluating Sums and Integrals?

  • Thread starter Thread starter latentcorpse
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integrals Sums
latentcorpse
Messages
1,411
Reaction score
0
at the very end of this lecture
http://www.ph.ed.ac.uk/~pmonthou/Statistical-Mechanics/documents/SM10.pdf

and the very beginning of this lecture
http://www.ph.ed.ac.uk/~pmonthou/Statistical-Mechanics/documents/SM11.pdf

we look at evaluating this sum by making it into an integral by two different methods :

(i) the sum and integral are both in n-space
(ii) the sum in n-space is converted into either an integral in k-space or energy space.

How do you know which method to use? would it just depend on the information given to you in an exam, i.e. if you were given say g(\epsilon) you would realize you have to convert to energy space - or am i completely missing the point here?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
It's just a change of variables. Both methods are basically equivalent, assuming the approximation at the very end of SM10 (10th wk. of Stat. Mech., I presume). However, the first one determines Z, whereas the second one gives the density of states, which is usually in terms of energy (momentum), not the mode number of energy (momentum).
 
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