Canonical ensemble: what if the phase space density is not known? In canonical ensemble, the probability is defined as
\begin{equation}
P(E)=\frac{g(E)\exp(-E/T)}{Z},
\end{equation}
and the partition function is defined as
\begin{equation}
Z(T)=\int_0^{\infty}dE\,g(E)\exp(-E/T),
\end{equation}
where $g(E)$ is the phase space density of the energy states. The usual argument that one uses is that the Boltzmann factor sharply decreases with increasing energy while $g(E)$ sharply increasing with increasing energy, such that the product is a Bell-shaped function. What if $g(E)$ is not known? I assume this corresponds to nonequilibrium statistical mechanics, because I don't necessary have a maximum in the probability that corresponds to a maximum of the entropy. Can anybody of you point me to a book or literature, where this problem is treated in a general way: canonical ensemble, where $g(E)$ is not known. I get lost in the literature, because it looks to me that in non equilbrium statistical mechanics there are several different approaches for different physical systems. Thanks a lot in advance!
Update:
Let's try with an example. We have a system in canonical distribution and in thermodynamical equilibrium. Everything is as usual. The partition function $Z(T)$ is just the Laplace transform of the density of states $g(E)$, so I can think of several kind of $g(E)$. If I take $g(E)=\theta(E−E_0)/(E−E_0)^4$, am I still describing a thermodynamical equilibrium? To my eyes $g(E)=\theta(E−E_0)/(E−E_0)^4$ is a possible, well defined, degeneracy of the energy states, $Z(T)$ guarantees the probability to be normalized (by definition). To my eyes everything seems to be fine: I have a normalized probability positive definite. I am thinking I could remove the divergency of $g(E)$ at $E_0$ by including an $\epsilon$, so this is not a problem for me. The only problem I have is: g(E) is not sharply increasing with increasing energy, so the probability is not a Bell-shaped function. Can I still interpret this as a thermodynamical equilibrium? And if so, how? I mean, is there anything similar in the literature with gas,... Or is there anything wrong in my reasoning? A reference or book to understand this would be also helpful.
 A: The only assumption that you have to use when writting the canonical distribution in terms of $g(E)$ is that the spectrum of energies is continuous. So either the system is classical or the quantum discrete espectrum can be approximated for a continuum. In all the examples that I've seen, the density turns out to be of the form
$g(E)\propto E^\alpha$
Independently of $\alpha$, $e^{-\beta E}$ goes to zero much faster than $g(E)$ goes to infinity, so the canonical partition function is well-defined. But this is a result rather than a requirement on $g(E)$!
A: Density of states is known, if the problem is defined - i.e., if we are given the Hamiltonian and the appropriate boundary conditions. This will remain unchange (or largely unchanged) in non-equilibrium - however, in non-equilibrium the equations that you use will not apply, since they were obtained for equilibrium system. In simpler words: in non-equilibrium system the probability of an energy state is not proportional to $e^{-\beta E}$.
Update
If we have a system described by a Hamiltonian $\mathcal{H}(p,q)$, then the partition function is given by
$$
Z = \int dp\int dqe^{-\beta\mathcal{H}(p,q)}=\\
\int dp\int dq\int dE\delta\left( E-\mathcal{H}(p,q)\right)e^{-\beta\mathcal{H}(p,q)}=\\
\int dEg(E)e^{-\beta E}, 
$$
where
$$
g(E)=\int dp\int dq\delta\left( E-\mathcal{H}(p,q)\right)
$$
In other words: if Hamiltonian $\mathcal{H}(p,q)$ is defined, then the density-of-states $g(E)$ is defined as well.
This may require greater care when some variables are discrete. E.g., let us consider a quantum system with energies $E_{n,\nu}$ degenerate over the index $\nu$, i.e., $E_{n, \nu}=E_n$. Writing
$$
g(E)=\sum_\nu \delta(E-E_{n,\nu})
$$
is not very useful. Indeed, here $g(E)$ is undefined between the energy levels and singular at the levels themselves. Most of the derivations done for continuous $g(E)$ are not practical here. A better way is to define numbers $g_n$ counting the degeneracy of the energy states and write the partition function as
$$
Z=tr\left[e^{-\beta H}\right]=\sum_{n,\nu}e^{-E_{n,\nu}}=\sum_ng_ne^{-E_n}
$$
A: I'm not able to follow your arguments and further, you have written the wrong distribution.
$$Z=\int dE\ g(E)e^{-\beta E}$$
We can consider the density of the state to increase as in the classical limit, everything will be smooth out.
Once you know $\mathcal{H}$, you can compute $g(E)$ using
$$g(E)=\frac{d\Omega}{dE}$$
Not knowing the $g(E)$ corresponds to not knowing the $\mathcal{H}(q,p)$.
