In Kinetic Theory, one studies the evolution of a system of $N$ particles interacting with each other. We use the notation $\boldsymbol{w}_{i}$ to describe the coordinates in phase-space of each particle. Liouville's Equation gives the incompressible evolution of the $N-$Body distribution function

$$f^{(N)} (\boldsymbol{w}_{1},...,\boldsymbol{w}_{N})$$

One can then define the reduced distribution function $f_{i}$ , for $1 \leq i \leq N$ as

$$f_{i} (\boldsymbol{w}_{1},...,\boldsymbol{w}_{i}) = \int d \boldsymbol{w}_{i+1} ... \boldsymbol{w}_{N} \; f^{(N)} (\boldsymbol{w}_{1},...,\boldsymbol{w}_{N}) $$

A system is said to be separable, if we have $f^{(N)} (\boldsymbol{w}_{1},...,\boldsymbol{w}_{N}) = \prod\limits_{i = 1}^{N} f_{1} (\boldsymbol{w}_{i})$.

In order to measure the $\textit{distance}$ to separability, one first introduces the two-body correlation function $g_{2} (\boldsymbol{w}_{1} , \boldsymbol{w}_{2})$ defined as

$$f_{2} (\boldsymbol{w}_{1},\boldsymbol{w}_{2}) = f_{1} (\boldsymbol{w}_{1}) \, f_{1} (\boldsymbol{w}_{2}) + g_{2} (\boldsymbol{w}_{1},\boldsymbol{w}_{2}) $$

This two-body correlation function plays a crucial role in the collision term appearing in the first equation of the BBGKY hierarchy.

My question is : What is the definition of the three-body correlation function $g_{3} (\boldsymbol{w}_{1},\boldsymbol{w}_{2},\boldsymbol{w}_{3})$ ?

My feeling would be that it is defined as

$$ \begin{aligned} f_{3} (\boldsymbol{w}_{1},\boldsymbol{w}_{2},\boldsymbol{w}_{3}) = &f_{1} (\boldsymbol{w}_{1}) \, f_{1} (\boldsymbol{w}_{2}) \, f_{1} (\boldsymbol{w}_{3}) \\& + \; f_{1}(\boldsymbol{w}_{1}) \, g_{2} (\boldsymbol{w}_{2},\boldsymbol{w}_{3}) + f_{1} (\boldsymbol{w}_{2}) \, g_{2} (\boldsymbol{w}_{1},\boldsymbol{w}_{3}) + f_{1} (\boldsymbol{w}_{3}) \, g_{2} (\boldsymbol{w}_{1},\boldsymbol{w}_{2}) \\& + \; g_{3} (\boldsymbol{w}_{1},\boldsymbol{w}_{2},\boldsymbol{w}_{3}) \end{aligned}$$

Is this definition correct ?

Then, would you have a nice expression for the general $n-$body correlation function $g_{n} (\boldsymbol{w}_{1},...,\boldsymbol{w}_{n})$ ?


Yes, your three-body expression is consistent with the BBGKY hierarchy. Regarding $n$-body correlations, there may be a way to express the collision integrand in terms of $g$ and $f$ functions, but I do not know it and can not remember ever seeing one. That said, I'll heartily upvote any answer that manages to write it out.

Most treatments of the problem opt for a diagrammatic representation, which tends to communicate the ideas behind many-body collision integrals in a more compact (if initially difficult-seeming) notation. I found this note to be a digestible introduction to this approach. I can provide additional references in comments if this turns out to be what you are looking for.

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for this reference, that I will read with great attention. As I come from a background with very few quantum notions, I tend to be scared by diagrammatic extensions, but it definitely seems to be worth the effort. Regarding the general expression of the n-body correlation function $g_{n}$, I came up with my own writing, which I will write in an answer to my question. However, the expressions tend to be rather complicated. $\endgroup$ – jibe Nov 5 '14 at 9:37

In order to generalize the nice writing of the $3-$body correlation function, we may define recursively the $n-$body correlation function $g_{n}$ as

$$ f_{n} (1,..,n) = \sum_{k=0}^{n} \frac{1}{k!(n\!-\!k)!} \sum_{\sigma \in \mathcal{S}_{n}} f_{1} (\sigma [1]) \, ... \, f_{1} (\sigma [k]) \, g_{n-k} (\sigma [k\!+\!1],...,\sigma [n]) \, , $$ where $\mathcal{S}_{n}$ is the set of all permutations of ${1,...,n}$. The prefactor in ${ 1/ (k! (n\!-\!k)!) }$ ensures the correct normalization of the function. Indeed, we rely on the fact the correlation functions $g_{k}$ are invariant under the permutations of its arguments. In the sum $\sum_{k=0}^{n}$, the case ${k=n}$ corresponds to the case of separability for which ${f_n = f_{1} ...f_{1}}$. As $k$ decreases, we are adding higher order correlation terms.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.