Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Jump to content
WikipediaThe Free Encyclopedia
Search

Bose–Einstein statistics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Description of the behaviour of bosons
Statistical mechanics

Inquantum statistics,Bose–Einstein statistics (B–E statistics) describes one of two possible ways in which a collection of non-interactingidentical particles may occupy a set of available discreteenergy states atthermodynamic equilibrium. The aggregation of particles in the same state, which is a characteristic of particles obeying Bose–Einstein statistics, accounts for the cohesive streaming oflaser light and the frictionless creeping ofsuperfluid helium. The theory of this behaviour was developed (1924–25) bySatyendra Nath Bose, who recognized that a collection of identical and indistinguishable particles could be distributed in this way. The idea was later adopted and extended byAlbert Einstein in collaboration with Bose.

Bose–Einstein statistics apply only to particles that do not follow thePauli exclusion principle restrictions. Particles that follow Bose-Einstein statistics are calledbosons, which have integer values ofspin. In contrast, particles that followFermi-Dirac statistics are calledfermions and havehalf-integer spins.

Equilibrium thermal distributions for particles with integer spin (bosons), half integer spin (fermions), and classical (spinless) particles. Average occupancyn{\displaystyle \langle n\rangle } is shown versus energyϵ{\displaystyle \epsilon } relative to the system chemical potentialμ{\displaystyle \mu }, whereT{\displaystyle T} is the system temperature, andkB{\displaystyle k_{\text{B}}} is the Boltzmann constant.

Bose–Einstein distribution

[edit]

At low temperatures, bosons behave differently fromfermions (which obey theFermi–Dirac statistics) in a way that an unlimited number of them can "condense" into the same energy state. This apparently unusual property also gives rise to the special state of matter – theBose–Einstein condensate. Fermi–Dirac and Bose–Einstein statistics apply whenquantum effects are important and the particles are "indistinguishable". Quantum effects appear if the concentration of particles satisfiesNVnq,{\displaystyle {\frac {N}{V}}\geq n_{\text{q}},}whereN is the number of particles,V is the volume, andnq is thequantum concentration, for which the interparticle distance is equal to thethermal de Broglie wavelength, so that thewavefunctions of the particles are barely overlapping.

Fermi–Dirac statistics applies to fermions (particles that obey thePauli exclusion principle), and Bose–Einstein statistics applies tobosons. As the quantum concentration depends on temperature, most systems at high temperatures obey the classical (Maxwell–Boltzmann) limit, unless they also have a very high density, as for awhite dwarf. Both Fermi–Dirac and Bose–Einstein becomeMaxwell–Boltzmann statistics at high temperature or at low concentration.

Bose–Einstein statistics was introduced forphotons in 1924 byBose and generalized to atoms byEinstein in 1924–25.

The expected number of particles in an energy statei for Bose–Einstein statistics is:

n¯i=gie(εiμ)/kBT1{\displaystyle {\bar {n}}_{i}={\frac {g_{i}}{e^{(\varepsilon _{i}-\mu )/k_{\text{B}}T}-1}}}

withεi >μ and whereni is the occupation number (the number of particles) in statei,gi{\displaystyle g_{i}} is thedegeneracy of energy leveli,εi is theenergy of theith state,μ is thechemical potential (zero for aphoton gas),kB is theBoltzmann constant, andT is theabsolute temperature.

The variance of this distributionV(n){\displaystyle V(n)} is calculated directly from the expression above for the average number.[1]V(n)=kTμn¯i=n(1+n)=n¯+n¯2{\displaystyle V(n)=kT{\frac {\partial }{\partial \mu }}{\bar {n}}_{i}=\langle n\rangle (1+\langle n\rangle )={\bar {n}}+{\bar {n}}^{2}}

For comparison, the average number of fermions with energyεi{\displaystyle \varepsilon _{i}} given byFermi–Dirac particle-energy distribution has a similar form:n¯i(εi)=gie(εiμ)/kBT+1.{\displaystyle {\bar {n}}_{i}(\varepsilon _{i})={\frac {g_{i}}{e^{(\varepsilon _{i}-\mu )/k_{\text{B}}T}+1}}.}

As mentioned above, both the Bose–Einstein distribution and the Fermi–Dirac distribution approaches theMaxwell–Boltzmann distribution in the limit of high temperature and low particle density, without the need for any ad hoc assumptions:

In addition to reducing to theMaxwell–Boltzmann distribution in the limit of highT{\displaystyle T} and low density, Bose–Einstein statistics also reduces toRayleigh–Jeans law distribution for low energy states withεiμkBT{\displaystyle \varepsilon _{i}-\mu \ll k_{\text{B}}T}, namelyn¯i=gie(εiμ)/kBT1gi(εiμ)/kBT=gikBTεiμ.{\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}{\bar {n}}_{i}&={\frac {g_{i}}{e^{(\varepsilon _{i}-\mu )/k_{\text{B}}T}-1}}\\&\approx {\frac {g_{i}}{(\varepsilon _{i}-\mu )/k_{\text{B}}T}}={\frac {g_{i}k_{\text{B}}T}{\varepsilon _{i}-\mu }}.\end{aligned}}}

History

[edit]

In 1900,Max Planck derived thePlanck law to explainblackbody radiation. For this purpose, he introduced the concept ofquanta of energy.

Władysław Natanson in 1911 concluded that Planck's law requires indistinguishability of "units of energy", although he did not frame this in terms of Einstein's light quanta.[2][3]

While presenting a lecture at theUniversity of Dhaka (in what was thenBritish India and is nowBangladesh) on the theory of radiation and theultraviolet catastrophe,Satyendra Nath Bose intended to show his students that the contemporary theory was inadequate, because it predicted results not in accordance with experimental results. During this lecture, Bose committed an error in applying the theory, which unexpectedly gave a prediction that agreed with the experiment. The error was a simple mistake – similar to arguing that flipping two fair coins will produce two heads one-third of the time – that would appear obviously wrong to anyone with a basic understanding of statistics (remarkably, this error resembled the famous blunder byJean le Rond d'Alembert known from hisCroix ou Pile article[4][5]). However, the results it predicted agreed with experiment, and Bose realized it might not be a mistake after all. For the first time, he took the position that the Maxwell–Boltzmann distribution would not be true for all microscopic particles at all scales. Thus, he studied the probability of finding particles in various states in phase space, where each state is a little patch having phase volume ofh3, and the position and momentum of the particles are not kept particularly separate but are considered as one variable.[citation needed]

Bose adapted this lecture into a short article called "Planck's law and the hypothesis of light quanta"[6][7] and submitted it to thePhilosophical Magazine. However, the referee's report was negative, and the paper was rejected. Undaunted, he sent the manuscript to Albert Einstein requesting publication in theZeitschrift für Physik. Einstein immediately agreed, personally translated the article from English into German (Bose had earlier translated Einstein's article on the general theory of relativity from German to English), and saw to it that it was published. Bose's theory achieved respect when Einstein sent his own paper in support of Bose's toZeitschrift für Physik, asking that they be published together. The paper came out in 1924.[8]

The reason Bose produced accurate results was that since photons are indistinguishable from each other, one cannot treat any two photons having equal quantum numbers (e.g., polarization and momentum vector) as being two distinct identifiable photons. Bose originally had a factor of 2 for the possible spin states, but Einstein changed it to polarization.[9] By analogy, if in an alternate universe coins were to behave like photons and other bosons, the probability of producing two heads would indeed be one-third, and so is the probability of getting a head and a tail which equals one-half for the conventional (classical, distinguishable) coins. Bose's "error" leads to what is now called Bose–Einstein statistics.

Bose and Einstein extended the idea to atoms and this led to the prediction of the existence of phenomena which became known as Bose–Einstein condensate, a dense collection of bosons (which are particles with integer spin, named after Bose), which was demonstrated to exist by experiment in 1995.

Derivation

[edit]

Derivation from the microcanonical ensemble

[edit]

In themicrocanonical ensemble, one considers a system with fixed energy, volume, and number of particles. We take a system composed ofN=ini{\textstyle N=\sum _{i}n_{i}} identical bosons,ni{\displaystyle n_{i}} of which have energyεi{\displaystyle \varepsilon _{i}} and are distributed overgi{\displaystyle g_{i}} levels or states with the same energyεi{\displaystyle \varepsilon _{i}}, i.e.gi{\displaystyle g_{i}} is the degeneracy associated with energyεi{\displaystyle \varepsilon _{i}}. The total energy of the system isE=iniεi{\textstyle E=\sum _{i}n_{i}\varepsilon _{i}}. Calculation of the number of arrangements ofni{\displaystyle n_{i}} particles distributed amonggi{\displaystyle g_{i}} states is a problem ofcombinatorics. Since particles are indistinguishable in the quantum mechanical context here, the number of ways for arrangingni{\displaystyle n_{i}} particles ingi{\displaystyle g_{i}} boxes (for thei{\displaystyle i}th energy level), where each box is capable of containing an infinite number of bosons (because for bosons thePauli exclusion principle does not apply), would be (see image):

The image represents one possible distribution of bosonic particles in different boxes. The box partitions (green) can be moved around to change the size of the boxes and as a result of the number of bosons each box can contain.

wi,BE=(ni+gi1)!ni!(gi1)!=Cnini+gi1,{\displaystyle w_{i,{\text{BE}}}={\frac {(n_{i}+g_{i}-1)!}{n_{i}!(g_{i}-1)!}}=C_{n_{i}}^{n_{i}+g_{i}-1},}whereCkm{\displaystyle C_{k}^{m}} is thek-combination of a set withm elements (Note also thatwi,BE{\displaystyle w_{i,{\text{BE}}}} represents the absolute non-normalized probability of an energy state withni{\displaystyle n_{i}} bosons and a degeneracy ofgi{\displaystyle g_{i}}, it is not the same as thewi{\displaystyle w_{i}} associated with the Gibbs formulation of entropy). The total number of arrangements in an ensemble of bosons is simply the product of the binomial coefficientsCnini+gi1{\displaystyle C_{n_{i}}^{n_{i}+g_{i}-1}} above over all the energy levels, i.e.WBE=iwi,BE=i(ni+gi1)!(gi1)!ni!,{\displaystyle W_{\text{BE}}=\prod _{i}w_{i,{\text{BE}}}=\prod _{i}{\frac {(n_{i}+g_{i}-1)!}{(g_{i}-1)!n_{i}!}},}

which for very largeni{\displaystyle n_{i}} andgi{\displaystyle g_{i}} can be simplified usingStirling's approximation to

WBE=i(ni+gi1e)ni+gi1(gi1e)gi1(nie)ni.{\displaystyle W_{\text{BE}}=\prod _{i}{\frac {({\frac {n_{i}+g_{i}-1}{e}})^{n_{i}+g_{i}-1}}{({\frac {g_{i}-1}{e}})^{g_{i}-1}({\frac {n_{i}}{e}})^{n_{i}}}}.}

The entropy of the system can then be expressed as

SBE=kBlnWBE=kBi[(ni+gi1)(ln(ni+gi1)1)(gi1)(ln(gi1)1)ni(lnni1)].{\displaystyle S_{\text{BE}}=k_{B}{\text{ln}}W_{\text{BE}}=k_{B}\sum _{i}[(n_{i}+g_{i}-1)({\text{ln}}(n_{i}+g_{i}-1)-1)-(g_{i}-1)({\text{ln}}(g_{i}-1)-1)-n_{i}({\text{ln}}n_{i}-1)].}

The three constraints we can impose on the system can be expressed as

iδni=0{\displaystyle \sum _{i}\delta n_{i}=0}

(conservation of N),

iϵiδni=0{\displaystyle \sum _{i}\epsilon _{i}\delta n_{i}=0}

(conservation of E), and

δSBE=0{\displaystyle \delta S_{\text{BE}}=0}

(second law of thermodynamics for a system at equilibrium).

This final constraint can be expanded to be in terms ofni{\displaystyle n_{i}}:

δSBE=niSBEδni=kBi[ln(ni+gi1)lnni]δni=0.{\displaystyle \delta S_{\text{BE}}={\frac {\partial }{\partial n_{i}}}S_{\text{BE}}\delta n_{i}=k_{B}\sum _{i}[{\text{ln}}(n_{i}+g_{i}-1)-{\text{ln}}n_{i}]\delta n_{i}=0.}

Now we can write

i[ln(ni+gi1)lnni]δni+Ciδniβiϵiδni=0,{\displaystyle \sum _{i}[{\text{ln}}(n_{i}+g_{i}-1)-{\text{ln}}n_{i}]\delta n_{i}+C\sum _{i}\delta n_{i}-\beta \sum _{i}\epsilon _{i}\delta n_{i}=0,}

for which to be true, it must be the case that for any i

ln(ni+gi1)lnni+Cβϵi=0.{\displaystyle {\text{ln}}(n_{i}+g_{i}-1)-{\text{ln}}n_{i}+C-\beta \epsilon _{i}=0.}

By solving forni{\displaystyle n_{i}} and simplifying we obtain

ni=gi1αeβϵi1,{\displaystyle n_{i}={\frac {g_{i}-1}{\alpha e^{\beta \epsilon _{i}}-1}},}

which for sufficiently largegi{\displaystyle g_{i}} reduces to

ni=giαeβϵi1,{\displaystyle n_{i}={\frac {g_{i}}{\alpha e^{\beta \epsilon _{i}}-1}},}

which is the form of the Bose-Einstein distribution. Unfortunately, to go further, we need to be in thegrand canonical ensemble so that we can specify an exact value for the chemical potential of the system and thereby calculateα{\displaystyle \alpha } andβ{\displaystyle \beta }. Note that this form holds even for a system of interacting bosons.

Derivation from the grand canonical ensemble

[edit]

The Bose–Einstein distribution, which applies only to a quantum system of non-interacting bosons, is naturally derived from thegrand canonical ensemble without any approximations.[10] In this ensemble, the system is able to exchange energy and exchange particles with a reservoir (temperatureT and chemical potentialμ fixed by the reservoir).

Due to the non-interacting quality, each available single-particle level (with energy levelϵ) forms a separate thermodynamic system in contact with the reservoir. That is, the number of particles within the overall systemthat occupy a given single particle state form a sub-ensemble that is also grand canonical ensemble; hence, it may be analysed through the construction of agrand partition function.

Every single-particle state is of a fixed energy,ε{\displaystyle \varepsilon }. As the sub-ensemble associated with a single-particle state varies by the number of particles only, it is clear that the total energy of the sub-ensemble is also directly proportional to the number of particles in the single-particle state; whereN{\displaystyle N} is the number of particles, the total energy of the sub-ensemble will then beNε{\displaystyle N\varepsilon }. Beginning with the standard expression for a grand partition function and replacingE{\displaystyle E} withNε{\displaystyle N\varepsilon }, the grand partition function takes the formZ=Nexp((NμNε)/kBT)=Nexp(N(με)/kBT){\displaystyle {\mathcal {Z}}=\sum _{N}\exp((N\mu -N\varepsilon )/k_{\text{B}}T)=\sum _{N}\exp(N(\mu -\varepsilon )/k_{\text{B}}T)}

This formula applies to fermionic systems as well as bosonic systems. Fermi–Dirac statistics arises when considering the effect of thePauli exclusion principle: whilst the number of fermions occupying the same single-particle state can only be either 1 or 0, the number of bosons occupying a single particle state may be any integer. Thus, the grand partition function for bosons can be considered ageometric series and may be evaluated as such:Z=N=0exp(N(με)/kBT)=N=0[exp((με)/kBT)]N=11exp((με)/kBT).{\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}{\mathcal {Z}}&=\sum _{N=0}^{\infty }\exp(N(\mu -\varepsilon )/k_{\text{B}}T)=\sum _{N=0}^{\infty }[\exp((\mu -\varepsilon )/k_{\text{B}}T)]^{N}\\&={\frac {1}{1-\exp((\mu -\varepsilon )/k_{\text{B}}T)}}.\end{aligned}}}

Note that the geometric series is convergent only ife(με)/kBT<1{\displaystyle e^{(\mu -\varepsilon )/k_{\text{B}}T}<1}, including the case whereε=0{\displaystyle \varepsilon =0}. This implies that the chemical potential for the Bose gas must be negative, i.e.,μ<0{\displaystyle \mu <0}, whereas the Fermi gas is allowed to take both positive and negative values for the chemical potential.[11]

The average particle number for that single-particle substate is given byN=kBT1Z(Zμ)V,T=1exp((εμ)/kBT)1{\displaystyle \langle N\rangle =k_{\text{B}}T{\frac {1}{\mathcal {Z}}}\left({\frac {\partial {\mathcal {Z}}}{\partial \mu }}\right)_{V,T}={\frac {1}{\exp((\varepsilon -\mu )/k_{\text{B}}T)-1}}}This result applies for each single-particle level and thus forms the Bose–Einstein distribution for the entire state of the system.[12][13]

Thevariance in particle number,σN2=N2N2{\textstyle \sigma _{N}^{2}=\langle N^{2}\rangle -\langle N\rangle ^{2}}, is:σN2=kBT(dNdμ)V,T=exp((εμ)/kBT)(exp((εμ)/kBT)1)2=N(1+N).{\displaystyle \sigma _{N}^{2}=k_{\text{B}}T\left({\frac {d\langle N\rangle }{d\mu }}\right)_{V,T}={\frac {\exp((\varepsilon -\mu )/k_{\text{B}}T)}{(\exp((\varepsilon -\mu )/k_{\text{B}}T)-1)^{2}}}=\langle N\rangle (1+\langle N\rangle ).}

As a result, for highly occupied states thestandard deviation of the particle number of an energy level is very large, slightly larger than the particle number itself:σNN{\displaystyle \sigma _{N}\approx \langle N\rangle }. This large uncertainty is due to the fact that theprobability distribution for the number of bosons in a given energy level is ageometric distribution; somewhat counterintuitively, the most probable value forN is always 0. (In contrast,classical particles have instead aPoisson distribution in particle number for a given state, with a much smaller uncertainty ofσN,classical=N{\textstyle \sigma _{N,{\rm {classical}}}={\sqrt {\langle N\rangle }}}, and with the most-probableN value being nearN{\displaystyle \langle N\rangle }.)

Derivation in the canonical approach

[edit]

It is also possible to derive approximate Bose–Einstein statistics in thecanonical ensemble. These derivations are lengthy and only yield the above results in the asymptotic limit of a large number of particles. The reason is that the total number of bosons is fixed in the canonical ensemble. The Bose–Einstein distribution in this case can be derived as in most texts by maximization, but the mathematically best derivation is by theDarwin–Fowler method of mean values as emphasized by Dingle.[14] See also Müller-Kirsten.[15] The fluctuations of the ground state in the condensed region are however markedly different in the canonical and grand-canonical ensembles.[16]

Derivation

Suppose we have a number of energy levels, labeled by indexi{\displaystyle i}, each level having energyεi{\displaystyle \varepsilon _{i}} and containing a total ofni{\displaystyle n_{i}} particles. Suppose each level containsgi{\displaystyle g_{i}} distinct sublevels, all of which have the same energy, and which are distinguishable. For example, two particles may have different momenta, in which case they are distinguishable from each other, yet they can still have the same energy. The value ofgi{\displaystyle g_{i}} associated with leveli{\displaystyle i} is called the "degeneracy" of that energy level. Any number of bosons can occupy the same sublevel.

Letw(n,g){\displaystyle w(n,g)} be the number of ways of distributingn{\displaystyle n} particles among theg{\displaystyle g} sublevels of an energy level. There is only one way of distributingn{\displaystyle n} particles with one sublevel, thereforew(n,1)=1{\displaystyle w(n,1)=1}. It is easy to see that there are(n+1){\displaystyle (n+1)} ways of distributingn{\displaystyle n} particles in two sublevels which we will write as:w(n,2)=(n+1)!n!1!.{\displaystyle w(n,2)={\frac {(n+1)!}{n!1!}}.}

With a little thought (seeNotes below) it can be seen that the number of ways of distributingn{\displaystyle n} particles in three sublevels isw(n,3)=w(n,2)+w(n1,2)++w(1,2)+w(0,2){\displaystyle w(n,3)=w(n,2)+w(n-1,2)+\cdots +w(1,2)+w(0,2)}so thatw(n,3)=k=0nw(nk,2)=k=0n(nk+1)!(nk)!1!=(n+2)!n!2!{\displaystyle w(n,3)=\sum _{k=0}^{n}w(n-k,2)=\sum _{k=0}^{n}{\frac {(n-k+1)!}{(n-k)!1!}}={\frac {(n+2)!}{n!2!}}}where we have used the followingtheorem involvingbinomial coefficients:k=0n(k+a)!k!a!=(n+a+1)!n!(a+1)!.{\displaystyle \sum _{k=0}^{n}{\frac {(k+a)!}{k!a!}}={\frac {(n+a+1)!}{n!(a+1)!}}.}

Continuing this process, we can see thatw(n,g){\displaystyle w(n,g)} is just a binomial coefficient(SeeNotes below)w(n,g)=(n+g1)!n!(g1)!.{\displaystyle w(n,g)={\frac {(n+g-1)!}{n!(g-1)!}}.}

For example, the population numbers for two particles in three sublevels are 200, 110, 101, 020, 011, or 002 for a total of six which equals 4!/(2!2!). The number of ways that a set of occupation numbersni{\displaystyle n_{i}} can be realized is the product of the ways that each individual energy level can be populated:W=iw(ni,gi)=i(ni+gi1)!ni!(gi1)!i(ni+gi)!ni!(gi)!{\displaystyle W=\prod _{i}w(n_{i},g_{i})=\prod _{i}{\frac {(n_{i}+g_{i}-1)!}{n_{i}!(g_{i}-1)!}}\approx \prod _{i}{\frac {(n_{i}+g_{i})!}{n_{i}!(g_{i})!}}}where the approximation assumes thatni1{\displaystyle n_{i}\gg 1}.

Following the same procedure used in deriving theMaxwell–Boltzmann statistics, we wish to find the set ofni{\displaystyle n_{i}} for whichW is maximised, subject to the constraint that there be a fixed total number of particles, and a fixed total energy. The maxima ofW{\displaystyle W} andln(W){\displaystyle \ln(W)} occur at the same value ofni{\displaystyle n_{i}} and, since it is easier to accomplish mathematically, we will maximise the latter function instead. We constrain our solution usingLagrange multipliers forming the function:f(ni)=ln(W)+α(Nni)+β(Eniεi){\displaystyle f(n_{i})=\ln(W)+\alpha (N-\sum n_{i})+\beta (E-\sum n_{i}\varepsilon _{i})}

Using theni1{\displaystyle n_{i}\gg 1} approximation and usingStirling's approximation for the factorials(x!xxex2πx){\displaystyle \left(x!\approx x^{x}\,e^{-x}\,{\sqrt {2\pi x}}\right)} givesf(ni)=i(ni+gi)ln(ni+gi)niln(ni)+α(Nni)+β(Eniεi)+K,{\displaystyle f(n_{i})=\sum _{i}(n_{i}+g_{i})\ln(n_{i}+g_{i})-n_{i}\ln(n_{i})+\alpha \left(N-\sum n_{i}\right)+\beta \left(E-\sum n_{i}\varepsilon _{i}\right)+K,}whereK is the sum of a number of terms which are not functions of theni{\displaystyle n_{i}}. Taking the derivative with respect toni{\displaystyle n_{i}}, and setting the result to zero and solving forni{\displaystyle n_{i}}, yields the Bose–Einstein population numbers:ni=gieα+βεi1.{\displaystyle n_{i}={\frac {g_{i}}{e^{\alpha +\beta \varepsilon _{i}}-1}}.}

By a process similar to that outlined in theMaxwell–Boltzmann statistics article, it can be seen that:dlnW=αdN+βdE{\displaystyle d\ln W=\alpha \,dN+\beta \,dE}which, using Boltzmann's famous relationshipS=kBlnW{\displaystyle S=k_{\text{B}}\,\ln W} becomes a statement of thesecond law of thermodynamics at constant volume, and it follows thatβ=1kBT{\displaystyle \beta ={\frac {1}{k_{\text{B}}T}}} andα=μkBT{\displaystyle \alpha =-{\frac {\mu }{k_{\text{B}}T}}} whereS is theentropy,μ{\displaystyle \mu } is thechemical potential,kB is theBoltzmann constant andT is thetemperature, so that finally:ni=gie(εiμ)/kBT1.{\displaystyle n_{i}={\frac {g_{i}}{e^{(\varepsilon _{i}-\mu )/k_{\text{B}}T}-1}}.}

Note that the above formula is sometimes written:ni=gieεi/kBT/z1,{\displaystyle n_{i}={\frac {g_{i}}{e^{\varepsilon _{i}/k_{\text{B}}T}/z-1}},}wherez=exp(μ/kBT){\displaystyle z=\exp(\mu /k_{\text{B}}T)} is the absoluteactivity, as noted by McQuarrie.[17]

Also note that when the particle numbers are not conserved, removing the conservation of particle numbers constraint is equivalent to settingα{\displaystyle \alpha } and therefore the chemical potentialμ{\displaystyle \mu } to zero. This will be the case for photons and massive particles in mutual equilibrium and the resulting distribution will be thePlanck distribution.

Notes

A much simpler way to think of Bose–Einstein distribution function is to consider thatn particles are denoted by identical balls andg shells are marked by g-1 line partitions. It is clear that thepermutations of thesen balls andg − 1 partitions will give different ways of arranging bosons in different energy levels. Say, for 3 (= n) particles and 3 (= g) shells, therefore(g − 1) = 2, the arrangement might be|●●|●, or||●●●, or|●|●●, etc. Hence the number of distinct permutations ofn + (g − 1) objects which haven identical items and (g − 1) identical items will be:(g1+n)!(g1)!n!{\displaystyle {\frac {(g-1+n)!}{(g-1)!n!}}}

See the image for a visual representation of one such distribution ofn particles ing boxes that can be represented asg − 1 partitions.
The image represents one possible distribution of bosonic particles in different boxes. The box partitions (green) can be moved around to change the size of the boxes and as a result of the number of bosons each box can contain.

OR

The purpose of these notes is to clarify some aspects of the derivation of the Bose–Einstein distribution for beginners. The enumeration of cases (or ways) in the Bose–Einstein distribution can be recast as follows. Consider a game of dice throwing in which there aren{\displaystyle n} dice, with each die taking values in the set{1,,g}{\displaystyle \{1,\dots ,g\}}, forg1{\displaystyle g\geq 1}. The constraints of the game are that the value of a diei{\displaystyle i}, denoted bymi{\displaystyle m_{i}}, has to begreater than or equal to the value of die(i1){\displaystyle (i-1)}, denoted bymi1{\displaystyle m_{i-1}}, in the previous throw, i.e.,mimi1{\displaystyle m_{i}\geq m_{i-1}}. Thus a valid sequence of die throws can be described by ann-tuple(m1,m2,,mn){\displaystyle (m_{1},m_{2},\dots ,m_{n})}, such thatmimi1{\displaystyle m_{i}\geq m_{i-1}}. LetS(n,g){\displaystyle S(n,g)} denote the set of these validn-tuples:

S(n,g)={(m1,m2,,mn)|mimi1,mi{1,,g},i=1,,n}.{\displaystyle S(n,g)=\left\{(m_{1},m_{2},\dots ,m_{n})\,{\Big |}\,m_{i}\geq m_{i-1},m_{i}\in \left\{1,\ldots ,g\right\},\forall i=1,\dots ,n\right\}.}1

Then the quantityw(n,g){\displaystyle w(n,g)} (defined above as the number of ways to distributen{\displaystyle n} particles among theg{\displaystyle g} sublevels of an energy level) is the cardinality ofS(n,g){\displaystyle S(n,g)}, i.e., the number of elements (or validn-tuples) inS(n,g){\displaystyle S(n,g)}. Thus the problem of finding an expression forw(n,g){\displaystyle w(n,g)} becomes the problem of counting the elements inS(n,g){\displaystyle S(n,g)}.

Examplen = 4,g = 3:S(4,3)={(1111),(1112),(1113)(a),(1122),(1123),(1133)(b),(1222),(1223),(1233),(1333)(c),(2222),(2223),(2233),(2333),(3333)(d)}{\displaystyle S(4,3)=\left\{\underbrace {(1111),(1112),(1113)} _{(a)},\underbrace {(1122),(1123),(1133)} _{(b)},\underbrace {(1222),(1223),(1233),(1333)} _{(c)},\underbrace {(2222),(2223),(2233),(2333),(3333)} _{(d)}\right\}}w(4,3)=15{\displaystyle w(4,3)=15} (there are15{\displaystyle 15} elements inS(4,3){\displaystyle S(4,3)})

Subset(a){\displaystyle (a)} is obtained by fixing all indicesmi{\displaystyle m_{i}} to1{\displaystyle 1}, except for the last index,mn{\displaystyle m_{n}}, which is incremented from1{\displaystyle 1} tog=3{\displaystyle g=3}. Subset(b){\displaystyle (b)} is obtained by fixingm1=m2=1{\displaystyle m_{1}=m_{2}=1}, and incrementingm3{\displaystyle m_{3}} from2{\displaystyle 2} tog=3{\displaystyle g=3}. Due to the constraintmimi1{\displaystyle m_{i}\geq m_{i-1}} on the indices inS(n,g){\displaystyle S(n,g)}, the indexm4{\displaystyle m_{4}} must automatically take values in{2,3}{\displaystyle \left\{2,3\right\}}. The construction of subsets(c){\displaystyle (c)} and(d){\displaystyle (d)} follows in the same manner.

Each element ofS(4,3){\displaystyle S(4,3)} can be thought of as amultiset of cardinalityn=4{\displaystyle n=4}; the elements of such multiset are taken from the set{1,2,3}{\displaystyle \left\{1,2,3\right\}} of cardinalityg=3{\displaystyle g=3}, and the number of such multisets is themultiset coefficient34=(3+4131)=(3+414)=6!4!2!=15{\displaystyle \left\langle {\begin{matrix}3\\4\end{matrix}}\right\rangle ={3+4-1 \choose 3-1}={3+4-1 \choose 4}={\frac {6!}{4!2!}}=15}

More generally, each element ofS(n,g){\displaystyle S(n,g)} is amultiset of cardinalityn{\displaystyle n} (number of dice) with elements taken from the set{1,,g}{\displaystyle \left\{1,\dots ,g\right\}} of cardinalityg{\displaystyle g} (number of possible values of each die), and the number of such multisets, i.e.,w(n,g){\displaystyle w(n,g)} is themultiset coefficient

w(n,g)=gn=(g+n1g1)=(g+n1n)=(g+n1)!n!(g1)!{\displaystyle w(n,g)=\left\langle {\begin{matrix}g\\n\end{matrix}}\right\rangle ={g+n-1 \choose g-1}={g+n-1 \choose n}={\frac {(g+n-1)!}{n!(g-1)!}}}

2

which is exactly the same as theformula forw(n,g){\displaystyle w(n,g)}, as derived above with the aid of atheorem involving binomial coefficients, namely

k=0n(k+a)!k!a!=(n+a+1)!n!(a+1)!.{\displaystyle \sum _{k=0}^{n}{\frac {(k+a)!}{k!a!}}={\frac {(n+a+1)!}{n!(a+1)!}}.}

3

To understand the decomposition

w(n,g)=k=0nw(nk,g1)=w(n,g1)+w(n1,g1)++w(1,g1)+w(0,g1){\displaystyle w(n,g)=\sum _{k=0}^{n}w(n-k,g-1)=w(n,g-1)+w(n-1,g-1)+\dots +w(1,g-1)+w(0,g-1)}

4

or for example,n=4{\displaystyle n=4} andg=3{\displaystyle g=3}w(4,3)=w(4,2)+w(3,2)+w(2,2)+w(1,2)+w(0,2),{\displaystyle w(4,3)=w(4,2)+w(3,2)+w(2,2)+w(1,2)+w(0,2),}

let us rearrange the elements ofS(4,3){\displaystyle S(4,3)} as followsS(4,3)={(1111),(1112),(1122),(1222),(2222)(α),(1113=),(1123=),(1223=),(2223=)(β),(1133==),(1233==),(2233==)(γ),(1333===),(2333===)(δ)(3333====)(ω)}.{\displaystyle S(4,3)=\left\{\underbrace {(1111),(1112),(1122),(1222),(2222)} _{(\alpha )},\underbrace {(111{\color {Red}{\underset {=}{3}}}),(112{\color {Red}{\underset {=}{3}}}),(122{\color {Red}{\underset {=}{3}}}),(222{\color {Red}{\underset {=}{3}}})} _{(\beta )},\underbrace {(11{\color {Red}{\underset {==}{33}}}),(12{\color {Red}{\underset {==}{33}}}),(22{\color {Red}{\underset {==}{33}}})} _{(\gamma )},\underbrace {(1{\color {Red}{\underset {===}{333}}}),(2{\color {Red}{\underset {===}{333}}})} _{(\delta )}\underbrace {({\color {Red}{\underset {====}{3333}}})} _{(\omega )}\right\}.}

Clearly, the subset(α){\displaystyle (\alpha )} ofS(4,3){\displaystyle S(4,3)} is the same as the setS(4,2)={(1111),(1112),(1122),(1222),(2222)}.{\displaystyle S(4,2)=\left\{(1111),(1112),(1122),(1222),(2222)\right\}.}

By deleting the indexm4=3{\displaystyle m_{4}=3} (shown inred with double underline) in the subset(β){\displaystyle (\beta )} ofS(4,3){\displaystyle S(4,3)}, one obtains the setS(3,2)={(111),(112),(122),(222)}.{\displaystyle S(3,2)=\left\{(111),(112),(122),(222)\right\}.}

In other words, there is a one-to-one correspondence between the subset(β){\displaystyle (\beta )} ofS(4,3){\displaystyle S(4,3)} and the setS(3,2){\displaystyle S(3,2)}. We write(β)S(3,2).{\displaystyle (\beta )\longleftrightarrow S(3,2).}

Similarly, it is easy to see that(γ)S(2,2)={(11),(12),(22)}{\displaystyle (\gamma )\longleftrightarrow S(2,2)=\left\{(11),(12),(22)\right\}}(δ)S(1,2)={(1),(2)}{\displaystyle (\delta )\longleftrightarrow S(1,2)=\left\{(1),(2)\right\}}(ω)S(0,2)={}=.{\displaystyle (\omega )\longleftrightarrow S(0,2)=\{\}=\varnothing .}

Thus we can writeS(4,3)=k=04S(4k,2){\displaystyle S(4,3)=\bigcup _{k=0}^{4}S(4-k,2)}or more generally,

S(n,g)=k=0nS(nk,g1);{\displaystyle S(n,g)=\bigcup _{k=0}^{n}S(n-k,g-1);}

5

and since the setsS(i,g1), for i=0,,n{\displaystyle S(i,g-1),{\text{ for }}i=0,\dots ,n}are non-intersecting, we thus have

w(n,g)=k=0nw(nk,g1),{\displaystyle w(n,g)=\sum _{k=0}^{n}w(n-k,g-1),}

6

with the convention that

w(0,g)=1 ,g, and w(n,0)=1 ,n.{\displaystyle w(0,g)=1\ ,\forall g,{\text{ and }}w(n,0)=1\ ,\forall n.}

7

Continuing the process, we arrive at the following formulaw(n,g)=k1=0nk2=0nk1w(nk1k2,g2)=k1=0nk2=0nk1kg=0nj=1g1kjw(ni=1gki,0).{\displaystyle w(n,g)=\sum _{k_{1}=0}^{n}\sum _{k_{2}=0}^{n-k_{1}}w(n-k_{1}-k_{2},g-2)=\sum _{k_{1}=0}^{n}\sum _{k_{2}=0}^{n-k_{1}}\cdots \sum _{k_{g}=0}^{n-\sum _{j=1}^{g-1}k_{j}}w(n-\sum _{i=1}^{g}k_{i},0).}Using the convention (7)2 above, we obtain the formula

w(n,g)=k1=0nk2=0nk1kg=0nj=1g1kj1,{\displaystyle w(n,g)=\sum _{k_{1}=0}^{n}\sum _{k_{2}=0}^{n-k_{1}}\cdots \sum _{k_{g}=0}^{n-\sum _{j=1}^{g-1}k_{j}}1,}

8

keeping in mind that forq{\displaystyle q} andp{\displaystyle p} being constants, we have

k=0qp=qp.{\displaystyle \sum _{k=0}^{q}p=qp.}9

It can then be verified that (8) and (2) give the same result forw(4,3){\displaystyle w(4,3)},w(3,3){\displaystyle w(3,3)},w(3,2){\displaystyle w(3,2)}, etc.

Interdisciplinary applications

[edit]
Main article:Bose–Einstein condensation (network theory)

Viewed as a pureprobability distribution, the Bose–Einstein distribution has found application in other fields:

  • In recent years, Bose–Einstein statistics has also been used as a method for term weighting ininformation retrieval. The method is one of a collection of DFR ("Divergence From Randomness") models,[18] the basic notion being that Bose–Einstein statistics may be a useful indicator in cases where a particular term and a particular document have a significant relationship that would not have occurred purely by chance. Source code for implementing this model is available from theTerrier project at the University of Glasgow.
  • The evolution of many complex systems, including theWorld Wide Web, business, and citation networks, is encoded in the dynamic web describing the interactions between the system's constituents. Despite their irreversible and nonequilibrium nature these networks follow Bose statistics and can undergo Bose–Einstein condensation. Addressing the dynamical properties of these nonequilibrium systems within the framework of equilibrium quantum gases predicts that the "first-mover-advantage", "fit-get-rich" (FGR) and "winner-takes-all" phenomena observed in competitive systems are thermodynamically distinct phases of the underlying evolving networks.[19]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^Pearsall, Thomas (2020).Quantum Photonics, 2nd edition. Graduate Texts in Physics. Springer.doi:10.1007/978-3-030-47325-9.ISBN 978-3-030-47324-2.
  2. ^Jammer, Max (1966).The conceptual development of quantum mechanics. McGraw-Hill. p. 51.ISBN 0-88318-617-9.
  3. ^Passon, Oliver; Grebe-Ellis, Johannes (2017-05-01)."Planck's radiation law, the light quantum, and the prehistory of indistinguishability in the teaching of quantum mechanics".European Journal of Physics.38 (3): 035404.arXiv:1703.05635.Bibcode:2017EJPh...38c5404P.doi:10.1088/1361-6404/aa6134.ISSN 0143-0807.S2CID 119091804.
  4. ^d'Alembert, Jean (1754). "Croix ou pile".L'Encyclopédie (in French).4.
  5. ^d'Alembert, Jean (1754)."Croix ou pile"(PDF).Xavier University. Translated by Richard J. Pulskamp. Retrieved2019-01-14.
  6. ^See p. 14, note 3, of the thesis:Michelangeli, Alessandro (October 2007).Bose–Einstein condensation: Analysis of problems and rigorous results(PDF) (Ph.D.).International School for Advanced Studies.Archived(PDF) from the original on 3 November 2018. Retrieved14 February 2019.
  7. ^Bose (2 July 1924)."Planck's law and the hypothesis of light quanta"(PostScript).University of Oldenburg. Retrieved30 November 2016.
  8. ^Bose (1924), "Plancks Gesetz und Lichtquantenhypothese",Zeitschrift für Physik (in German),26 (1):178–181,Bibcode:1924ZPhy...26..178B,doi:10.1007/BF01327326,S2CID 186235974
  9. ^Ghose, Partha (2023). "The Story of Bose, Photon Spin and Indistinguishability".arXiv:2308.01909 [physics.hist-ph].
  10. ^Srivastava, R. K.; Ashok, J. (2005). "Chapter 7".Statistical Mechanics.New Delhi: PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd.ISBN 9788120327825.
  11. ^Landau, L. D., Lifšic, E. M., Lifshitz, E. M., & Pitaevskii, L. P. (1980). Statistical physics (Vol. 5). Pergamon Press.
  12. ^"Chapter 6".Statistical Mechanics. PHI Learning Pvt. January 2005.ISBN 9788120327825.
  13. ^The BE distribution can be derived also from thermal field theory.
  14. ^R. B. Dingle,Asymptotic Expansions: Their Derivation and Interpretation, Academic Press (1973), pp. 267–271.
  15. ^H. J. W. Müller-Kirsten,Basics of Statistical Physics, 2nd ed., World Scientific (2013),ISBN 978-981-4449-53-3.
  16. ^Ziff R. M.; Kac, M.; Uhlenbeck, G. E. (1977)."The ideal Bose–Einstein gas, revisited".Physics Reports32: 169–248.
  17. ^See McQuarrie in citations
  18. ^Amati, G.; C. J. Van Rijsbergen (2002). "Probabilistic models of information retrieval based on measuring the divergence from randomness"ACM TOIS20(4):357–389.
  19. ^Bianconi, G.; Barabási, A.-L. (2001). "Bose–Einstein Condensation in Complex Networks".Physical Review Letters86: 5632–5635.

References

[edit]
  • Annett, James F. (2004).Superconductivity, Superfluids and Condensates. New York: Oxford University Press.ISBN 0-19-850755-0.
  • Carter, Ashley H. (2001).Classical and Statistical Thermodynamics. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.ISBN 0-13-779208-5.
  • Griffiths, David J. (2005).Introduction to Quantum Mechanics (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson, Prentice Hall.ISBN 0-13-191175-9.
  • McQuarrie, Donald A. (2000).Statistical Mechanics (1st ed.). Sausalito, CA: University Science Books. p. 55.ISBN 1-891389-15-7.
Theory
Statistical thermodynamics
Models
Mathematical approaches
Critical phenomena
Entropy
Applications
Physics
Works
In popular
culture
Prizes
Books about
Einstein
Family
Related
Wikimedia Commons has media related toBose-Einstein distribution.
Authority control databasesEdit this at Wikidata
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bose–Einstein_statistics&oldid=1307660842"
Categories:
Hidden categories:

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp