An Introduction to Statistical Mechanics and Thermodynamics

Author(s):  
Robert H. Swendsen

This is a textbook on statistical mechanics and thermodynamics. It begins with the molecular nature of matter and the fact that we want to describe systems containing many (1020) particles. The first part of the book derives the entropy of the classical ideal gas using only classical statistical mechanics and Boltzmann’s analysis of multiple systems. The properties of this entropy are then expressed as postulates of thermodynamics in the second part of the book. From these postulates, the structure of thermodynamics is developed. Special features are systematic methods for deriving thermodynamic identities using Jacobians, the use of Legendre transforms as a basis for thermodynamic potentials, the introduction of Massieu functions to investigate negative temperatures, and an analysis of the consequences of the Nernst postulate. The third part of the book introduces the canonical and grand canonical ensembles, which are shown to facilitate calculations for many models. An explanation of irreversible phenomena that is consistent with time-reversal invariance in a closed system is presented. The fourth part of the book is devoted to quantum statistical mechanics, including black-body radiation, the harmonic solid, Bose–Einstein and Fermi–Dirac statistics, and an introduction to band theory, including metals, insulators, and semiconductors. The final chapter gives a brief introduction to the theory of phase transitions. Throughout the book, there is a strong emphasis on computational methods to make abstract concepts more concrete.

2000 ◽  
Vol 14 (04) ◽  
pp. 405-409 ◽  
Author(s):  
LUCA SALASNICH

We discuss the Bose–Einstein condensation (BEC) for an ideal gas of bosons in the framework of Tsallis's nonextensive statistical mechanics. We study the corrections to the st and ard BEC formulas due to a weak nonextensivity of the system. In particular, we consider three cases in the D-dimensional space: the homogeneous gas, the gas in a harmonic trap and the relativistic homogenous gas. The results show that small deviations from the extensive Bose statistics produce remarkably large changes in the BEC transition temperature.


2001 ◽  
Vol 15 (09) ◽  
pp. 1253-1256 ◽  
Author(s):  
LUCA SALASNICH

In a recent paper1 we discussed the Bose–Einstein condensation (BEC) in the framework of Tsallis's nonextensive statistical mechanics. In particular, we studied an ideal gas of bosons in a confining harmonic potential. In this memoir we generalize our previous analysis by investigating an ideal Bose gas in a generic power-law external potential. We derive analytical formulas for the energy of the system, the BEC transition temperature and the condensed fraction.


2000 ◽  
Vol 14 (05) ◽  
pp. 485-506 ◽  
Author(s):  
KAZUMOTO IGUCHI ◽  
KAZUHIKO AOMOTO

We derive an exact integral representation for the gr and partition function for an ideal gas with exclusion statistics. Using this we show how the Wu's equation for the exclusion statistics appears in the problem. This can be an alternative proof for the Wu's equation. We also discuss that singularities are related to the existence of a phase transition of the system.


2020 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. 423-441
Author(s):  
Józef Spałek

The principal mathematical idea behind the statistical properties of black-body radiation (photons) was introduced already by L. Boltzmann (1877/2015) and used by M. Planck (1900; 1906) to derive the frequency distribution of radiation (Planck’s law) when its discrete (quantum) structure was additionally added to the reasoning. The fundamental physical idea – the principle of indistinguishability of the quanta (photons) – had been somewhat hidden behind the formalism and evolved slowly. Here the role of P. Debye (1910), H. Kamerlingh Onnes and P. Ehrenfest (1914) is briefly elaborated and the crucial role of W. Natanson (1911a; 1911b; 1913) is emphasized. The reintroduction of this Natanson’s statistics by S. N. Bose (1924/2009) for light quanta (called photons since the late 1920s), and its subsequent generalization to material particles by A. Einstein (1924; 1925) is regarded as the most direct and transparent, but involves the concept of grand canonical ensemble of J. W. Gibbs (1902/1981), which in a way obscures the indistinguishability of the particles involved. It was ingeniously reintroduced by P. A. M. Dirac (1926) via postulating (imposing) the transposition symmetry onto the many-particle wave function. The above statements are discussed in this paper, including the recent idea of the author (Spałek 2020) of transformation (transmutation) – under specific conditions – of the indistinguishable particles into the corresponding to them distinguishable quantum particles. The last remark may serve as a form of the author’s post scriptum to the indistinguishability principle.


Author(s):  
Anthony Duncan ◽  
Michel Janssen

After three papers on statistical mechanics, mostly duplicating work by Boltzmann and Gibbs, Einstein relied heavily on arguments from statistical mechanics in the most revolutionary of his famous 1905 papers, the one introducing the light‐quantum hypothesis. He showed that the equipartition theorem inescapably leads to the classical Rayleigh‐Jeans law for black‐body radiation and the ultraviolet catastrophe (as Ehrenfest later called it). Einstein and Ehrenfest were the first to point this out but the physics community only accepted it after the venerable H.A. Lorentz, came to the same conclusion in 1908. The central argument for light quanta in Einstein’s 1905 paper involves a comparison between fluctuations in black‐body radiation in the Wien regime and fluctuations in an ideal gas. From this comparison Einstein inferred that black‐body radiation in the Wien regime behaves as a collection of discrete, independent, and localized particles. We show that the same argument works for non‐localized quantized wave modes. Although nobody noticed this flaw in Einstein’s reasoning at the time, his fluctuation argument, and several others like it, failed to convince anybody of the reality of light quanta. Even Millikan’s verification of Einstein formula for the photoelectric effect only led to the acceptance of the formula, not of the theory behind it. Einstein’s quantization of matter was better received, especially his simple model of a solid consisting of quantized oscillators. This model could explain why the specific heats of solids fall off sharply as the temperature is lowered instead of remaining constant as it should according to the well‐known Dulong‐Petit law, which is a direct consequence of the equipartition theorem. The confirmation of Einstein’s theory of specific heats by Nernst and his associates was an important milestone in the development of quantum theory and a central topic at the first Solvay conference of 1911, which brought the fledgling theory to the attention of a larger segment of the physics community. Returning to the quantum theory after spending a few years on the development of general relativity, Einstein combined his light‐quantum hypothesis with elements of Bohr’s model of the atom in a new quantum radiation theory.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document