1
$\begingroup$

I am trying to understand the derivation of the variational principle as presented in Bob Evan's 1979 work.[1]. The part that is tripping me up is when he presents the following result. He starts by defining a functional of the form

$$ \Omega [f_N] = \mathrm{Tr_{cl}} \left[ f_N \left( H - \mu N + \beta^{-1}\ln{f_N} \right) \right] \, .\tag{1}\label{functional}$$ where $f_N$ is an $N$-particle probability distribution and $H$ is the Hamiltonian. Note that $H$ here is a phase space function, and not equivalent to the thermodynamic energy $E$.

This functional reduces to the grand potential $\Omega$ when $f_N$ is the equilibrium distribution $\rho^{(N)}$, which is given by

$$ \rho^{(N)} = \frac{\exp-\beta(H - \mu N)}{\Xi} \tag{2}\label{rho}$$

An important step in deriving the variational principle is showing that

$$ \Omega [f_N] = \Omega[\rho^{(N)}] + \beta^{-1}(\mathrm{Tr_{cl}}f_N\ln f_N -\mathrm{Tr_{cl}}f_N\ln \rho^{(N)}) \tag{3}\label{var}$$

This is accomplished by using \eqref{rho} to show that $$ -\beta^{-1}\ln\rho^{(N)} = H - \mu N + \Omega[\rho^{(N)}]$$ or $$ \Omega = H - \mu N + \beta^{-1}\ln\rho^{(N)} \tag{4} \label{omega}$$ and substituting \eqref{omega} into \eqref{functional}. This is where I am hung up; it seems very odd that \eqref{omega} is true. From the thermodynamic perspective, the grand potential should be given by the expectation values for the energy $\langle E\rangle$ and average particle number $\langle N \rangle$. This gives $$\Omega = \langle E \rangle - \mu \langle N \rangle - TS $$ Replacing $S$ with the Gibbs entropy formula, and using the fact that the expectation values can be calculated from the equilibrium probability distribution by $\langle A \rangle = \mathrm{Tr_{cl}}\left[\rho^{(N)}A\right]$ one now has for the grand potential

$$\Omega = \mathrm{Tr_{cl}}[\rho^{(N)}H] - \mu \mathrm{Tr_{cl}}[\rho^{(N)}N] + \beta^{-1}\mathrm{Tr_{cl}}[\rho^{(N)}\ln\rho^{(N)}] \tag{5}\label{omegaTrue}$$

Comparing equations \eqref{omega} and \eqref{omegaTrue}, it seems that the trace is unnecessary; but from a statistical mechanics perspective, it seems odd that one doesn't need to average over phase space to find the value of the grand potential, and that simply knowing the value of $H$ and $\rho^{(N)}$ at a single phase space point is enough to specify $\Omega$, which is what \eqref{omega} seems to imply. Is there some assumption that I am missing that makes this work. Or is \eqref{omega} really valid?

1 Evans, R. (1979). The nature of the liquid-vapour interface and other topics in the statistical mechanics of non-uniform, classical fluids. Advances in Physics, 28(2), 143–200.

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

0
$\begingroup$

eq(4) and eq(5) are equivalent. First I rewrite eq(5) as the result of $f_N = \rho^{(N)}$ in eq(1): $$\Omega [\rho^{(N)}] = \mathrm{Tr_{cl}} \left[ \rho^{(N)} \left( H - \mu N + \beta^{-1}\ln{\rho^{(N)}} \right) \right] \tag{1}$$

$$ \rho^{(N)} = \frac{\exp-\beta(H - \mu N)}{\Xi} \tag{2}\label{2}$$ From the above equation \eqref{2} we can get: $$ H - \mu N + \beta^{-1} \ln {\rho^{(N)} } = -\beta^{-1} \ln{ \Xi } \tag{3}\label{3} $$ Substituting 3 into 1, we get: $$ \begin{aligned} \Omega [\rho^{(N)}] =&\mathrm{Tr_{cl}} \left[ \rho^{(N)} \left( H - \mu N + \beta^{-1}\ln{\rho^{(N)}} \right) \right] \\ =& \mathrm{Tr_{cl}} \left[ \rho^{(N)} \left(-\beta^{-1} \ln{ \Xi } \right)\right] \\ =&\sum_{N=0}^{\infty} \dfrac{1}{h^{3N}N!} \int d\mathbf{r}^N d\mathbf{p}^N \frac{\exp-\beta(H - \mu N)}{\Xi} \left(-\beta^{-1} \ln{ \Xi} \right) \\ =&-\beta^{-1} \ln{ \Xi} \dfrac{1}{\Xi}\sum_{N=0}^{\infty} \dfrac{1}{h^{3N}N!} \int d\mathbf{r}^N d\mathbf{p}^N \exp-\beta(H - \mu N) \\ =&-\beta^{-1} \ln{ \Xi} \\ =&H - \mu N + \beta^{-1} \ln {\rho^{(N)} } \end{aligned} $$ So the two are equivalent.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Equations 4 and 5 are not equivalent. The value of H, N, and $\rho^{(N)}$ at a point in phase space are not the same as their expectation values. The algebraic manipulations aren't where I am having a problem; the problem I am having is that Eq. (3) in your answer implies that the entire partition function, and by extension the grand potential, can be determined from knowing $H$, $N$, and $\rho^{(N)}$ at a single point in phase space. $\endgroup$
    – scmartin
    May 20, 2022 at 14:14
  • $\begingroup$ The value of $H$,$N$and $\rho^{(N)}$ at a point in phase are not the same as their expectation values. but their sum $-\beta^{-1} \ln \Xi$ is a constant. So eq(4) is equivalent to eq(5), you should look at my derivation again. $\endgroup$ May 21, 2022 at 0:08
  • $\begingroup$ I have proved that eq(4) is equal to eq(5). If you think the two are not equivalent, then you should point out the error in my derivation. $\endgroup$ May 21, 2022 at 0:14

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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