How Does This Quantum Mechanics Approximation Problem Work?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Narcol2000
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Approximation
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on understanding the approximation of the expression e^{-\hbar \omega / 2k_BT} / (1 - e^{-\hbar \omega / k_BT}) to k_BT / \hbar\omega when T is significantly greater than \hbar\omega/k_B. The user initially struggles with the derivation but finds success using Taylor expansions, particularly for small values of x. They confirm that their method aligns with established limits in calculus, leading to the desired result. The conversation highlights the validity of the Taylor expansion approach while also appreciating the clarity of alternative explanations. Ultimately, the approximation is validated through mathematical reasoning.
Narcol2000
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
I'm having problems understanding how

<br /> \frac{e^{-\hbar \omega / 2k_BT}}{1-e^{-\hbar \omega / k_BT}}<br />

approximates to

<br /> k_BT/ \hbar\omega<br />
when

<br /> T &gt;&gt; \hbar\omega/k_B<br />

Seems like it should be simple but don't quite see how to arrive at this result.

*update*

I have tried using taylor expansions of exp(-x) and 1-exp(-x) and just using the first expansion term since if T&gt;&gt;\hbar\omega/k_B then \hbar\omega/k_BT should be small. This seems to give the right answer but i'd be interested in knowing if indeed my method is ok and if there are alternate methods.
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
If you call
x = - {{\hbar \omega } \over {2 k_B T}}
(and x \to 0 when T &gt;&gt; \hbar\omega/k_B)

then your expression is equivalent to
{{e^x } \over {1 - e^{2x} }}

Utilizing the known limit
\mathop {\lim }\limits_{x \to 0} {{e^x -1} \over x} = 1

you can write
<br /> \mathop {\lim }\limits_{x \to 0} {{e^x } \over {1 - e^{2x} }} = \mathop {\lim }\limits_{x \to 0} {{e^x } \over {\left( {1 - e^x } \right)\left( {1 + e^x } \right)}}\left( {{{e^x - 1 } \over x}} \right) \to -{1 \over {2x}}

So the expression near zero goes like
-{1 \over {2x}}
that means that the original expression goes like
{{k_B T} \over {\hbar \omega }}
 
Thanks, the way i did it was equivalent it seems, but yours was a lot more clearer..

thanks again.
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Is it possible to arrange six pencils such that each one touches the other five? If so, how? This is an adaption of a Martin Gardner puzzle only I changed it from cigarettes to pencils and left out the clues because PF folks don’t need clues. From the book “My Best Mathematical and Logic Puzzles”. Dover, 1994.
Back
Top