1

I am reading a book on statistical mechanics in which the author uses a Taylor Expansion to derive the Boltzmann distribution. He starts with the following equation for the probability of any state $\epsilon$:

$$P(\epsilon) \propto \Omega(E- \epsilon) \times 1$$

The author takes the natural logarithm of both sides and expands the right hand side in a taylor expansion about $\epsilon = 0$, to get this:

$$ln\left(\Omega(E- \epsilon)\right) = ln(\Omega(E)) - \frac{d \ ln(\Omega(E))}{dE}\epsilon + ...$$

I don't understand how the author has reached this, the corresponding standard taylor series expansion about $a$ is:

$$f(x) = f(a) +\frac{d \ f(x)}{dx}(x-a)+...$$

I don't see which part of $ln\left(\Omega(E- \epsilon)\right)$ should be considered $x$, and which part should be considered $a$. Should $(E- \epsilon)$ all be considered $x$, should it be only $E$ or $\epsilon$?

Connor
  • 647

1 Answers1

1

In your post it is clear that $x=\epsilon$ and $a=0$. As such let $$ f(x)=\log\Omega(E-x). $$ Expanding about $x=0$ we subsequently have for the first two terms of the Taylor seires $$ \tag{1} f(x)=f(0)+\left(\frac{\mathrm d}{\mathrm dx}\log\Omega(E-x)\Big|_{x=0}\right)x+\cdots. $$ Upon inspection $f(0)=\log\Omega(E)$. Now consider some function $g$ and observe that $$ \frac{\mathrm d}{\mathrm dx}g(E-x)\Big|_{x=0}=-g^\prime(E-x)\Big|_{x=0}=-g^\prime(E). $$ But we can get the same result by writing $$ -\frac{\mathrm d}{\mathrm dE}g(E)=-g^\prime(E). $$ Thus, $$ -\frac{\mathrm d}{\mathrm dE}g(E)=\frac{\mathrm d}{\mathrm dx}g(E-x)\Big|_{x=0}. $$ Bringing both results together yields $$ \tag{2} f(x)=\log\Omega(E)-\frac{\mathrm d}{\mathrm dE}\log\Omega(E)x+\cdots, $$ which is the result in your textbook.

  • Thanks! So what's the general name for a Taylor's series that is in the form of something like this? Secondarily, why would it be acceptable to perform the switch between $\frac{d}{dx}$ and $\frac{d}{dE}$ that you indicated? – Connor Sep 23 '21 at 18:47
  • 1
    I'm sorry but to me it isn't just plain old Taylor series, I haven't seen the expansion of a function with an extra variable in the brackets. Does it have a different name, do you have to treat it differently? Or do you simply consider the $E$ meaningless and progress as if it was just $f(x)$ so to speak? – Connor Sep 23 '21 at 19:09
  • I disagree that this is what the author did, what is your opinion on this question/ answer: https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/254792/how-is-the-taylor-expansion-for-fx-h-derived

    It seems the second answer to that question fits the expansion, what do you think?

    – Connor Sep 23 '21 at 19:36