Why is the gas energy in a g-field 5/2KNkT ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter LeakedPaladin
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Gas
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on using a demon algorithm to model classical gases and their behavior under various conditions. Findings indicate that the energy for a classical gas in 3D aligns with the expected 3/2 NkT result, while a 2D classical gas shows a slightly lower energy of 0.989 NkT. In a relativistic 3D gas, the energy is 2.992 NkT, consistent with equipartition principles. A surprising result arises from a classical gas in a uniform gravitational field, where the energy is calculated at 2.486 NkT, leading to questions about hidden constraints affecting the expected degrees of freedom. The discussion emphasizes the importance of the Hamiltonian's structure in determining energy distributions in these systems.
LeakedPaladin
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I am messing around with classical gasses using a demon algorithm, trying to reproduce the behavior of ideal gasses in various situations. Exitingly, this is working very well. Here are my findings so far:

Classical gas, 3D : E=1.497 NkT - the usual 3/2 NkT result

Classical gas, 2D : E=0.989 NkT - 2 DoF, so 2/2 NkT

Relativistic gas, 3D : E = 2.992 NkT - as expected, can be derived from equipartition

Classical gas, uniform gravitational field, 3D : E = 2.486 NkT

Now the last one quite surprises me. Why is that he case? Intuitevely I would expect 3 DoF on |p| and 3 DoF on x, so 6*1/2 NkT = 3NkT. Is there a hidden constraint?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The equipartition theorem holds true only for phase-space degrees of freedom that enter quadratically in the Hamiltonian. For an ideal gas in a homogeneous gravitational field you have for the single-particle Hamiltonian
H=\frac{\vec{p}^2}{2m}+m g z.
The classical probility distribution is thus given by
P(\vec{x},\vec{p})=\frac{1}{Z} \exp[-\beta H(\vec{x},\vec{p})].
The mean kinetic energy for particles in a cubic box of length L thus is
\langle E_{\text{kin}} \rangle=\frac{3}{2} T
and the mean potential energy
\langle m g z \rangle=m g L \left (1+\frac{1}{\exp(m g L/T)-1} \right )-T.
 
Hello! Let's say I have a cavity resonant at 10 GHz with a Q factor of 1000. Given the Lorentzian shape of the cavity, I can also drive the cavity at, say 100 MHz. Of course the response will be very very weak, but non-zero given that the Loretzian shape never really reaches zero. I am trying to understand how are the magnetic and electric field distributions of the field at 100 MHz relative to the ones at 10 GHz? In particular, if inside the cavity I have some structure, such as 2 plates...
Back
Top