04.08.2013 Views

Statistical Mechanics - Physics at Oregon State University

Statistical Mechanics - Physics at Oregon State University

Statistical Mechanics - Physics at Oregon State University

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

6.3. MAXIMUM ENTROPY PRINCIPLE. 131<br />

for a closed system we get the same answers, which shows th<strong>at</strong> the procedure is<br />

OK.<br />

How to deal with discrete eigenvalues.<br />

So far we have described our st<strong>at</strong>e vectors in a Hilbert space with st<strong>at</strong>es<br />

<strong>at</strong> a given energy, volume, and particle number. Since the Hamiltonian is the<br />

oper<strong>at</strong>or th<strong>at</strong> governs all quantum mechanics, volume and particle number are<br />

ingredients of the Hamiltonian. But energy is the outcome! Therefore, it is<br />

much better to work in the more n<strong>at</strong>ural Hilbert space of st<strong>at</strong>e vectors th<strong>at</strong><br />

correspond to the Hamiltonian. The density oper<strong>at</strong>or in this case is<br />

ρ = Cδ(U − H) (6.73)<br />

where C is some constant, determined by 1 = CTr δ(U − H).<br />

This form of the density oper<strong>at</strong>or in the microcanonical ensemble implicitly<br />

assumes th<strong>at</strong> we take the thermodynamic limit. For a finite system the energy<br />

eigenvalues are discrete and the δ -function will yield a number of infinitely high<br />

peaks. Therefore we are not able to take the deriv<strong>at</strong>ive <br />

∂S<br />

∂U which is needed<br />

to define the temper<strong>at</strong>ure!<br />

We can, however, rewrite the delta function. Using a standard property we<br />

find:<br />

ρ = C U<br />

δ(<br />

V V<br />

H<br />

− ) (6.74)<br />

V<br />

and in the thermodynamic limit the spacing in the energy density U<br />

V goes to<br />

zero. But th<strong>at</strong> is the wrong order of limits, which can lead to problems!<br />

M<strong>at</strong>hem<strong>at</strong>ical details about delta function limits.<br />

In order to be more precise m<strong>at</strong>hem<strong>at</strong>ically, we need a limiting procedure<br />

for the delta-function. For example, one can choose a Gaussian approxim<strong>at</strong>ion<br />

ρ = C 1<br />

ɛ √ (U−H)2<br />

e− ɛ<br />

π 2 (6.75)<br />

which gives the correct result in the limit ɛ → 0. In order to evalu<strong>at</strong>e the trace<br />

of ρlogρ we now have to sum over st<strong>at</strong>es with all possible values of the energy.<br />

Clearly we will get a value for the entropy which is defined for all values of U,<br />

and the partial deriv<strong>at</strong>ive of the entropy with respect to U will give a good value<br />

for the inverse temper<strong>at</strong>ure. But now we have two limits to deal with: N → ∞<br />

and ɛ → 0. The thermodynamic limit N → ∞ has to be taken after all physical<br />

st<strong>at</strong>e variables have been set equal to the values needed in the problem. For<br />

example, if needed the limit T → 0 has to be taken first. The limit ɛ → 0<br />

is not rel<strong>at</strong>ed to a physical st<strong>at</strong>e variable. This limiting procedure is a purely<br />

m<strong>at</strong>hem<strong>at</strong>ical trick. Therefore, the order of taking limits is first to assign all

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!