This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
https://www.scribd.com/doc/80307198/9611203v1
04/18/2013
text
original
r
X
i
v
:
c
o
n
d

m
a
t
/
9
6
1
1
2
0
3
v
1
[
c
o
n
d

m
a
t
.
s
t
a
t

m
e
c
h
]
2
6
N
o
v
1
9
9
6
Generalized Distribution Functions and an Alternative Approach
to Generalized Planck Radiation Law
Uˇgur TIRNAKLI
∗
, Fevzi B
¨
UY
¨
UKKILIC¸ , Doˇgan DEM
˙
IRHAN
Department of Physics, Faculty of Science,
Ege University 35100, Bornova
˙
IzmirTURKEY
(February 1, 2008)
In this study, recently introduced generalized distribution functions are
summarized and by using one of these distribution functions, namely gener
alized Planck distribution, an alternative approach to the generalized Planck
law for the blackbody radiation has been tackled. The expression obtained
is compared with the expression given by C. Tsallis et al. [Phys. Rev. E52,
(1995) 1447], and it is found that this approximate scheme provides bounds
to the exact result, depending on the values of q index.
I. INTRODUCTION
Although the necessity of nonextensive statistical thermodynamics has been very clear
for a long time in many physical systems such as threedimensional selfgravitating astro
physical objects [1], black holes and superstrings [2], L´evytype random walks [3], vortex
problem [4] and dark matter [5] where longrange microscopic interactions are present; an in
creasing tendency towards nonextensive formalisms keeps growing nowadays, along two lines:
QuantumGrouplike approaches and Generalized Statistical Thermodynamics (GST).
GST is recently introduced by C. Tsallis [6,7] and then the formalism not only has been
applied to numerous concepts of statistical thermodynamics [828], but also prosperous for
the physical systems [2933] where extensive BoltzmannGibbs statistics fails. The detailed
∗
email: tirnakli@fenfak.ege.edu.tr
1
reviews of the general aspects of the formalism can be found in [34], and some investigations
of the subject from the mathematical point of view are now available in [35].
The formalism has been based upon two axioms; namely (i) the entropy of the system
is given by [6]
S
q
= −k
1 −
W
i=1
p
q
i
1 −q
(1)
where k is a conventional positive constant, p
i
is the probability of the system to be in a
microstate, W is the total number of conﬁgurations of the system and q is a new parameter
which is especially called the Tsallis qindex; (ii) the qexpectation value of an observable O
is given by
¸O)
q
=
W
i=1
p
q
i
O
i
. (2)
On the other hand, GST contains BoltzmannGibbs Statistics as a special case when q = 1.
Clearly S
q
is extensive if and only if q = 1 and (1 −q) can be interpreted as the measure of
the lack of extensivity of the system [24].
II. GENERALIZED DISTRIBUTION FUNCTIONS
Amongst the systems handled in the frame of GST, the classical and quantum gases
have been investigated for the ﬁrst time by two of the authors of the present study and
the results have been presented in two seperate manuscripts [13,14]. In the ﬁrst paper, the
fractal inspired entropies of the classical and quantum gases have been found by making
use of the statistical weights and the generalized distribution functions have been obtained
by introducing the constraints related to the statistical properties of the particles into the
entropy [13]. In the second paper, the Tsallis entropy have been used for the same purpose
and the same conclusions for the generalized distribution functions have been attained but
in this case the constraints concerned with the statistical properties of the particles have
been introduced in the calculation of the partition functions. However, the factorization
2
of the partition function which was used in this calculations has been the main disputable
point of the approximation. We claim that this approximate procedure provides a bound
to the exact results, depending on the values of q. In order to prove this, let us take a very
simple physical system which could be in bounded or free states with the energy levels A
and B. For this system let us take the inequality
[1 + (1 −q)(A+ B)]
1
1−q
,= [1 + (1 −q)A]
1
1−q
[1 + (1 −q)B]
1
1−q
. (3)
It is easy to rewrite this in exponential form
exp
_
1
1 −q
ln[1 + (1 −q)(A+ B)]
_
,=
exp
_
1
1 −q
ln [1 + (1 −q)A] +
1
1 −q
ln[1 + (1 −q)B]
_
. (4)
After some algebra it is straightforward to ﬁnd
exp
_
1
1 −q
ln [1 + (1 −q)A+ (1 −q)B]
_
,=
exp
_
1
1 −q
ln
_
1 + (1 −q)A+ (1 −q)B + (1 −q)
2
AB
_
_
(5)
If the lefthand side and righthand side of this inequality are called ”exact” and ”ap
proximation” respectively, then it follows that exact>approximation for q > 1 whereas
exact<approximation for q < 1. It must be emphasized that this situation is valid if and
only if the product A.B is positive. In photon case, which is the subject of this study, A
and B, namely energy levels of the system are deﬁned to be hν/kT that is always positive.
In addition to this, an inequality can be derived for the partition function within the
frame of (3). The grand partition function reads :
Z
q
=
{r
i
}
_
1 −β(1 −q)
m
r=1
(ǫ
r
−µ)
_ 1
1−q
, (6)
where ¦r
i
¦ are the elements of the grand canonical ensemble. For the photon case (µ = 0),
the eq.(6) becomes
Z
q
=
{r
i
}
_
1 −β(1 −q)H
{r
i
}
_ 1
1−q
(7)
3
where H
{r
i
}
=
m
r=1
ǫ
r
is the Hamiltonian of the system. Employing the inequality (3),
another inequality for the partition function can be written down as
{r
i
}
[1 −β(1 −q) (ǫ
1
+ + ǫ
m
)]
1
1−q
,=
{r
i
}
[1 −β(1 −q)ǫ
1
]
1
1−q
[1 −β(1 −q)ǫ
m
]
1
1−q
. (8)
Since the free energy is a monotonic function of Z
q
, namely,
F
q
= −
1
β
Z
1−q
q
−1
1 −q
, (9)
it is straightforward to write an inequality for the free energy.
In the frame of the above simple mathematical analysis, it is evident that our approx
imation scheme provides a lower or upper bound to the exact results, depending on the q
values.
Within this approximation procedure the generalized distribution functions are given by
¸n
r
)
MB
q
= [1 −(1 −q)β(ǫ
r
−µ)]
1
1−q
(10)
¸n
r
)
FD
q
=
1
[1 −(1 −q)β(ǫ
r
−µ)]
1
q−1
+ 1
(11)
¸n
r
)
BE
q
=
1
[1 −(1 −q)β(ǫ
r
−µ)]
1
q−1
−1
(12)
where MB, FD and BE stand for MaxwellBoltzmann, FermiDirac and BoseEinstein,
respectively. In a very recent eﬀort [36], quantum statistics has been studied by means of a
kinetic approach and the distribution functions corresponding to the Tsallis probability are
found to be the same with the eqs.(10)(12). It is easy to show that the standard distribution
functions are recovered in the q → 1 limit. On the other hand, when µ is set equal to zero
in eq.(12), one can obtain the generalized Planck distribution (PD)
¸n
r
)
PD
q
=
1
[1 −(1 −q)βǫ
r
]
1
q−1
−1
(13)
which is going to be used here for making an approximation to the derivation of the general
ized Planck radiation law by following the wellknown procedure available in many textbooks
[37] of Statistical Physics.
4
III. THE GENERALIZATION OF THE PLANCK RADIATION LAW
Very recently, the generalization of the Planck radiation law is obtained by Tsallis et
al. [24] in order to see whether present cosmic background radiation is (slightly) diﬀerent
from Planck radiation law due to longrange gravitational inﬂuence. In the course of their
investigations, making use of the partition function given by Z
q
≈ Z
1
_
1 −
1
2
(1 −q)β
2
¸H
2
)
1
_
(where Z
1
and ¸H
2
)
1
stand for the values of these quantities in standard BoltzmannGibbs
statistics) in the β(1 − q) → 0 limit, Tsallis et al. have achieved the generalization of the
Planck law given in the following expression for q
∼
= 1 [24]
D
q
(ν)h
2
c
3
8π(kT)
3
≈
x
3
e
x
−1
_
1 −e
−x
_
q−1
_
1 + (1 −q)x
_
1 +e
−x
1 −e
−x
−
x
2
1 + 3e
−x
(1 −e
−x
)
2
__
(14)
where D
q
(ν) is the photon energy density per unit volume, ν is the photon frequency and x ≡
hν/kT. Then they applied this expression to the cosmic microwave background radiation to
test for deviations from Planck radiation law and found a 95% conﬁdence limit of [q −1[ <
3.610
−5
from the data obtained via Cosmic Background Explorer Satellite by Mather et al.
[38]. In the present work we’re trying to generalize the Planck law by using an approximate
scheme which seems simpler and more general (not necessarily q
∼
= 1).
The distribution of photons among the various quantum states with deﬁnite values of the
momentum h
k/2π and energies hν can be given by generalized Planck distribution (eq.(13))
¸n
r
)
PD
q
=
1
_
1 −(1 −q)
hν
kT
_ 1
q−1
−1
. (15)
On the other hand, the number of quantum states of photons with frequencies between ν and
ν + dν is 8πV ν
2
dν/c
3
(V being the volume of the photon gas). It is clear that multiplying
this quantity by eq.(15), the number of photons in this frequency interval can be determined:
dN =
8πV
c
3
ν
2
dν
_
1 −(1 −q)
hν
kT
_ 1
q−1
−1
. (16)
Therefore the photon energy in this interval is given by
dE =
8πhV
c
3
ν
3
dν
_
1 −(1 −q)
hν
kT
_ 1
q−1
−1
, (17)
5
and ﬁnally the photon energy density per unit volume is
D
q
(ν) =
8πh
c
3
ν
3
_
1 −(1 −q)
hν
kT
_ 1
q−1
−1
, (18)
which generalizes the Planck’s law. The comparison of this expression with that given by
Tsallis et al. (eq.(5) of their paper) is illustrated in Figure. It is observed in the ﬁgure that,
at low frequencies the two D
q
(ν) plots completely ﬁt into one another. On the other hand,
towards the frequency values where the maxima of the curves occur, the plots diverge from
one another by a certain amount. This is an expected result since the implication of our
approximation scheme shows itself as an upper (lower) bound to the exact result when q > 1
(q < 1). It is worthwhile to imply here that the bound is exactly same as the one that has
appeared in ref.[39] where an application of the generalized distribution functions has been
discussed (see Fig.1 and Fig.3 of this reference).
Moreover, in the x ≡ hν/kT << 1 case, we verify that eq.(18) becomes
D
q
(ν) =
8π(kT)
3
h
2
c
3
x
3
x +
(2−q)
2!
x
2
+
(2−q)(3−2q)
3!
x
3
+
, (19)
which generalizes the RayleighJeans law. As it is expected, in the q →1 limit this expression
transforms to D
1
(ν) ∝ x
2
∝ ν
2
which corresponds to the standard RayleighJeans law.
In addition to this, it is straightforward to generalize StefanBoltzmann law and show
that it remains the same, i.e. it is still proportional to T
4
, but with a qdependent constant
(σ
q
). To see this, let us write the total emitted power per unit surface,
P
q
=
_
∞
0
dνD
q
(ν) . (20)
If we use here eq.(18) with the dimensionless variable x,
P
q
=
8πk
4
h
3
c
3
T
4
_
∞
0
xdx
[1 −(1 −q)x]
1
q−1
−1
(21)
can be obtained. Since the integral term is independent of T, it can be written down as
P
q
= σ
q
T
4
, (22)
6
which is the generalized StefanBoltzmann law, with a qdependent prefactor.
It is also possible to obtain the generalized Wien shift law. By making eq.(18) maximum,
ν
m
(the frequency value which makes D
q
(ν) maximum) yields a nonlinear equation :
_
hν
m
kT
(3q −4) + 3
_ _
1 −(1 −q)
hν
m
kT
_ 1
q−1
+
hν
m
kT
3(1 −q) −3 = 0 . (23)
Although it is very diﬃcult to ﬁnd an analytical solution for this equation, the graphical
solution is adequate for our purpose. From the graphical solution, for q = 0.95 and q = 1.05
we have found hν
m
/kT = 2.444 and 3.347, respectively. For the same values of Tsallis
qindex, eq.(19) in ref.[24] gives hν
m
/kT = 2.563 and 3.08. Once again it is possible to
see that our results provide bounds to the exact ones. Moreover, the result ν
m
(q > 1) >
ν
m
(q = 1) > ν
m
(q < 1), which appears in ref.[24], is also valid in the present investigation.
The important diversity between this result and that of the q
G
deformed quantum groups
investigations namely ν
m
(g
G
) = ν
m
(1/q
G
) and ν
m
(q
G
< 1) < ν
m
(q
G
= 1) is readily observed.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
Although the generalized distribution functions are ﬁrst introduced in 1993, there has
been no attempt to apply them to the physical systems until a very recent eﬀort performed
by Pennini et al. [39] where two single particles are considered. In this letter, our goal
is to apply one of the generalized distribution functions (generalized Planck distribution)
to another physical system (Planck law for the blackbody radiation). On the other hand,
the approximate procedure used here to ﬁnd a bound to the generalized Planck law is
simpler than that of Tsallis et al. [24] (since the procedure is completely the same with
that followed in standard textbooks of Statistical Physics for the derivation of standard
Planck law) and also the bound seems to be more general, since not necessarily q
∼
= 1 (it
will have a meaning, of course, if a physical system requiring this condition exists). Lastly,
it is worthwhile to imply here that all the generalized laws derived here (i.e. generalized
Planck law, generalized RayleighJeans law, StefanBoltzmann law and Wien law) transform
to corresponding standard wellknown laws in the q →1 limit.
7
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors acknowledge TUBITAK and Ege University for making Prof. C. Tsallis’
visit to Izmir possible. We are very indebted to Prof. C. Tsallis for the helpful discussions
as well as kindly supplying to us some of the references therein.
8
[1] A.M. Salzberg, J. Math. Phys. 6 (1965); W.C. Saslaw, Gravitational Physics of Stellar and
Galactic Systems (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1985) p.217 .
[2] P.T. Landsberg, J. Stat. Phys. 35 (1984) 159; D. Pavon, General Relativity and Gravitation
19 (1987) 375.
[3] M.F. Shlesinger and B.D. Hughes, Physica A109 (1981) 597; E.W. Montroll and M.F.
Shlesinger, J. Stat. Phys. 32 (1983) 209.
[4] R.H. Kraichnan and D. Montgomery, Rep. Prog. Phys. 43 (1980) 547.
[5] H. Bacry, Phys. Lett. B317 (1993) 523.
[6] C. Tsallis, J. Stat. Phys. 52 (1988) 479.
[7] E.M.F. Curado and C. Tsallis, J. Phys. A24 (1991) L69; Corrigenda: 24 (1991) 3187; 25 (1992)
1019.
[8] N. Ito and C. Tsallis, Nuovo Cimento 11 (1989) 907.
[9] R.F.S. Andrade, Physica A175 (1991) 285; A203 (1994) 486.
[10] A.M. Mariz, Phys. Lett. A165 (1992) 409; J.D. Ramshaw, Phys. Lett. A175 (1993) 169 and
171.
[11] A. Plastino and A.R. Plastino, Phys. Lett. A177 (1993) 177.
[12] A.R. Plastino and A. Plastino, Physica A202 (1994) 438.
[13] F. B¨ uy¨ ukkılı¸ c and D. Demirhan, Phys. Lett. A181 (1993) 24.
[14] F. B¨ uy¨ ukkılı¸ c, D. Demirhan and A. G¨ ule¸ c, Phys. Lett. A197 (1995) 209.
[15] E.P. da Silva, C. Tsallis and E.M.F. Curado, Physica A199 (1993) 137; 203 (1994) E160; A.
Chame and E.M.L. de Mello, J. Phys. A27 (1994) 3663.
9
[16] D.A. Stariolo, Phys. Lett. A185 (1994) 262.
[17] A. Plastino and C. Tsallis, J. Phys. A26 (1993) L893.
[18] F. B¨ uy¨ ukkılı¸ c and D. Demirhan, Z. Phys. B99 (1995) 137.
[19] A.R. Plastino, A. Plastino and C. Tsallis, J. Phys. A27 (1994) 5707.
[20] F.D. Nobre and C. Tsallis, Physica A213 (1995) 337.
[21] S. Curilef and C. Tsallis, Physica A215 (1995) 542.
[22] E.F. Sarmento, Physica A218 (1995) 482.
[23] F. B¨ uy¨ ukkılı¸ c, D. Demirhan and U. Tırnaklı, ”Generalization of the MeanField Ising Model
within Tsallis Thermostatistics”, Physica A, in press.
[24] C. Tsallis, F.C. Sa Barreto and E.D. Loh, Phys Rev E52 (1995) 1447.
[25] D.H. Zanette, Physica A223 (1996) 87.
[26] A. Plastino and M. Portesi, Physica A (1996), in press; M. Portesi and A. Plastino, Proc.IV In
ternational Conference on Squeezed States and Uncertainty Relations (FICSSUR95, Taiyvan,
China) NASA Conference Publication Series (Dec.1995), in press.
[27] A.K. Rajagopal, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (1995) 1048; Physica B212 (1995) 309; G. Kaniadakis,
A. Lavagno and P. Quarati, ”Generalized Fractional Statistics”, preprint.
[28] S. Curilef, Phys. Lett. A (1996), in press.
[29] A.R. Plastino and A. Plastino, Phys. Lett. A174 (1993) 384.
[30] P.A. Alemany and D.H. Zanette, Phys. Rev. E49 (1994) R956; C. Tsallis, S.V.F. Levy, A.M.C.
Souza and R. Maynard, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75 (1995) 3589; C. Tsallis, A.M.C. de Souza and
R. Maynard, in ”Levy Flights and Related Phenomena in Physics”, Eds. M.F. Shlesinger, U.
Frisch and G.M. Zaslavsky (Springer, Berlin, 1995), page 269; D.H. Zanette and P.A. Alemany,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 75 (1995) 366.
10
[31] L.S. Lucena, L.R. da Silva and C. Tsallis, Phys. Rev. E51 (1995) 6247.
[32] B.M. Boghosian, Phys. Rev. E53 (1996) 4754.
[33] G. Kaniadakis, A. Lavagno and P. Quarati, Phys. Lett. B369 (1996) 308.
[34] C. Tsallis, in ”New Trends in Magnetism, Magnetic Materials and their Applications”, Eds.
J.L. MoranLopez and J.M. Sanchez (Plenum Press, New York, 1994), page 451; in ”Chaos,
Solitons and Fractals”, Ed. G. Marshall (Pergamon Press, 1994), page 539.
[35] G.A. Raggio, J. Math. Phys. 36 (1995) 4785; G.R. Guerberoﬀ, P.A. Pury and G.A. Raggio,
J. Math. Phys. 37 (1996) 1790; G.R. Guerberoﬀ and G.A. Raggio, J. Math. Phys. 37 (1996)
1776.
[36] G. Kaniadakis and P. Quarati, ”Polynomial expansion of diﬀusion and drift coeﬃcients for
classical and quantum statistics”, preprint.
[37] L.D. Landau and E.M. Lifshitz, ”Statistical Physics”, Third ed. (Pergamon Press, Oxford,
1985).
[38] J.C. Mather et al., Astrophys. J. 420 (1994) 439.
[39] F. Pennini, A. Plastino and A.R. Plastino, Phys. Lett. A208 (1995) 309.
11
FIGURE CAPTIONS
Blackbody photon energy density per unit volume versus hν/kT in the frame of this work
and ref.[24].
12
Fig.1
hν/kT
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
D
q
(
ν
)
h
2
c
3
/
8
π
k
3
T
3
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
q=0.95 (ref.[24])
q=0.95 (This Work)
q=1
q=1.05 (ref.[24])
q=1.05 (This Work)
13
pi is the probability of the system to be in a microstate. Clearly Sq is extensive if and only if q = 1 and (1 − q) can be interpreted as the measure of the lack of extensivity of the system [24]. GST contains BoltzmannGibbs Statistics as a special case when q = 1. (2) On the other hand. (ii) the qexpectation value of an observable O is given by W O q = i=1 pq Oi i . The formalism has been based upon two axioms. the fractal inspired entropies of the classical and quantum gases have been found by making use of the statistical weights and the generalized distribution functions have been obtained by introducing the constraints related to the statistical properties of the particles into the entropy [13]. In the ﬁrst paper. the Tsallis entropy have been used for the same purpose and the same conclusions for the generalized distribution functions have been attained but in this case the constraints concerned with the statistical properties of the particles have been introduced in the calculation of the partition functions. W is the total number of conﬁgurations of the system and q is a new parameter which is especially called the Tsallis qindex.14]. the classical and quantum gases have been investigated for the ﬁrst time by two of the authors of the present study and the results have been presented in two seperate manuscripts [13.reviews of the general aspects of the formalism can be found in [34]. However. In the second paper. and some investigations of the subject from the mathematical point of view are now available in [35]. the factorization 2 . GENERALIZED DISTRIBUTION FUNCTIONS Amongst the systems handled in the frame of GST. namely (i) the entropy of the system is given by [6] 1 − W pq i=1 i Sq = −k 1−q (1) where k is a conventional positive constant. II.
then it follows that exact>approximation for q > 1 whereas exact<approximation for q < 1. The grand partition function reads : m 1 1−q Zq = {ri } 1 − β(1 − q) r=1 (ǫr − µ) . the eq. (6) where {ri } are the elements of the grand canonical ensemble. A and B. In order to prove this.(6) becomes Zq = {ri } 1 − β(1 − q)H{ri } 3 1 1−q (7) .of the partition function which was used in this calculations has been the main disputable point of the approximation. It is easy to rewrite this in exponential form 1 ln [1 + (1 − q)(A + B)] = 1−q 1 1 ln [1 + (1 − q)A] + ln [1 + (1 − q)B] . let us take a very simple physical system which could be in bounded or free states with the energy levels A and B. In photon case. an inequality can be derived for the partition function within the frame of (3). In addition to this. namely energy levels of the system are deﬁned to be hν/kT that is always positive. For the photon case (µ = 0). For this system let us take the inequality [1 + (1 − q)(A + B)] 1−q = [1 + (1 − q)A] 1−q [1 + (1 − q)B] 1−q . depending on the values of q. exp 1−q 1−q exp After some algebra it is straightforward to ﬁnd exp exp 1 ln [1 + (1 − q)A + (1 − q)B] = 1−q (5) 1 1 1 (3) (4) 1 ln 1 + (1 − q)A + (1 − q)B + (1 − q)2 AB 1−q If the lefthand side and righthand side of this inequality are called ”exact” and ”approximation” respectively. We claim that this approximate procedure provides a bound to the exact results. which is the subject of this study. It must be emphasized that this situation is valid if and only if the product A.B is positive.
when µ is set equal to zero in eq. one can obtain the generalized Planck distribution (P D) nr PD q = 1 [1 − (1 − q)βǫr ] q−1 − 1 1 (13) which is going to be used here for making an approximation to the derivation of the generalized Planck radiation law by following the wellknown procedure available in many textbooks [37] of Statistical Physics. β 1−q (9) it is straightforward to write an inequality for the free energy. F D and BE stand for MaxwellBoltzmann. (8) Since the free energy is a monotonic function of Zq .where H{ri } = m r=1 ǫr is the Hamiltonian of the system.(12). Fq = − 1−q 1 Zq − 1 . On the other hand. Within this approximation procedure the generalized distribution functions are given by nr nr MB q = [1 − (1 − q)β(ǫr − µ)] 1−q 1 [1 − (1 − q)β(ǫr − µ)] q−1 + 1 1 [1 − (1 − q)β(ǫr − µ)] q−1 − 1 1 1 1 (10) (11) FD q = nr BE q = (12) where MB. FermiDirac and BoseEinstein. 4 . another inequality for the partition function can be written down as [1 − β(1 − q) (ǫ1 + · · · + ǫm )] 1−q = {ri } 1 [1 − β(1 − q)ǫ1 ] 1−q · · · [1 − β(1 − q)ǫm ] 1−q {ri } 1 1 . Employing the inequality (3). It is easy to show that the standard distribution functions are recovered in the q → 1 limit. In a very recent eﬀort [36]. quantum statistics has been studied by means of a kinetic approach and the distribution functions corresponding to the Tsallis probability are found to be the same with the eqs. respectively.(10)(12). depending on the q values. namely. In the frame of the above simple mathematical analysis. it is evident that our approximation scheme provides a lower or upper bound to the exact results.
−1 (15) On the other hand.(15). have achieved the generalization of the Planck law given in the following expression for q ∼ 1 [24] = x3 Dq (ν)h2 c3 1 − e−x ≈ x 8π(kT )3 e −1 q−1 1 + (1 − q)x 1 + e−x x 1 + 3e−x − 1 − e−x 2 (1 − e−x )2 (14) where Dq (ν) is the photon energy density per unit volume. the generalization of the Planck radiation law is obtained by Tsallis et al. −1 (17) .6×10−5 from the data obtained via Cosmic Background Explorer Satellite by Mather et al. It is clear that multiplying this quantity by eq. −1 (16) Therefore the photon energy in this interval is given by dE = 8πhV c3 ν 3 dν 1 − (1 − 5 hν q) kT 1 q−1 . the number of photons in this frequency interval can be determined: dN = 8πV c3 ν 2 dν 1 − (1 − hν q) kT 1 q−1 . = The distribution of photons among the various quantum states with deﬁnite values of the momentum hk/2π and energies hν can be given by generalized Planck distribution (eq. ν is the photon frequency and x ≡ hν/kT . In the course of their 1 investigations. THE GENERALIZATION OF THE PLANCK RADIATION LAW Very recently. Then they applied this expression to the cosmic microwave background radiation to test for deviations from Planck radiation law and found a 95% conﬁdence limit of q − 1 < 3. making use of the partition function given by Zq ≈ Z1 1 − 2 (1 − q)β 2 H2 1 (where Z1 and H2 1 stand for the values of these quantities in standard BoltzmannGibbs statistics) in the β(1 − q) → 0 limit. Tsallis et al. [24] in order to see whether present cosmic background radiation is (slightly) diﬀerent from Planck radiation law due to longrange gravitational inﬂuence. In the present work we’re trying to generalize the Planck law by using an approximate scheme which seems simpler and more general (not necessarily q ∼ 1).III. [38].(13)) nr PD q = 1 hν 1 − (1 − q) kT 1 q−1 . the number of quantum states of photons with frequencies between ν and ν + dν is 8πV ν 2 dν/c3 (V being the volume of the photon gas).
It is worthwhile to imply here that the bound is exactly same as the one that has appeared in ref. Moreover. In addition to this. let us write the total emitted power per unit surface. at low frequencies the two Dq (ν) plots completely ﬁt into one another. This is an expected result since the implication of our approximation scheme shows itself as an upper (lower) bound to the exact result when q > 1 (q < 1).(18) becomes Dq (ν) = 8π(kT )3 h2 c3 x + x3 (2−q) 2 x 2! + (2−q)(3−2q) 3 x 3! + ··· .(5) of their paper) is illustrated in Figure. i. Since the integral term is independent of T .e. in the x ≡ hν/kT << 1 case. To see this. towards the frequency values where the maxima of the curves occur.3 of this reference). (eq.1 and Fig.[39] where an application of the generalized distribution functions has been discussed (see Fig. −1 (18) which generalizes the Planck’s law. Pq = ∞ 0 dνDq (ν) . we verify that eq. the plots diverge from one another by a certain amount. 6 (22) . it is straightforward to generalize StefanBoltzmann law and show that it remains the same.(18) with the dimensionless variable x. On the other hand. it is still proportional to T 4 . in the q → 1 limit this expression transforms to D1 (ν) ∝ x2 ∝ ν 2 which corresponds to the standard RayleighJeans law. it can be written down as Pq = σq T 4 . The comparison of this expression with that given by Tsallis et al. As it is expected. Pq = 8πk 4 4 T h3 c3 ∞ 0 xdx [1 − (1 − q)x] q−1 − 1 1 (21) can be obtained.and ﬁnally the photon energy density per unit volume is Dq (ν) = 8πh c3 ν3 1 − (1 − hν q) kT 1 q−1 . It is observed in the ﬁgure that. (20) If we use here eq. (19) which generalizes the RayleighJeans law. but with a qdependent constant (σq ).
7 . is also valid in the present investigation.563 and 3. our goal is to apply one of the generalized distribution functions (generalized Planck distribution) to another physical system (Planck law for the blackbody radiation). the result νm (q > 1) > νm (q = 1) > νm (q < 1). On the other hand.(18) maximum. Moreover. νm (the frequency value which makes Dq (ν) maximum) yields a nonlinear equation : hνm (3q − 4) + 3 kT hνm 1 − (1 − q) kT 1 q−1 + hνm 3(1 − q) − 3 = 0 . eq. [39] where two single particles are considered. The important diversity between this result and that of the qG deformed quantum groups investigations namely νm (gG ) = νm (1/qG ) and νm (qG < 1) < νm (qG = 1) is readily observed. Once again it is possible to see that our results provide bounds to the exact ones. By making eq. For the same values of Tsallis qindex. it is worthwhile to imply here that all the generalized laws derived here (i. for q = 0.444 and 3. IV.[24]. which appears in ref. the approximate procedure used here to ﬁnd a bound to the generalized Planck law is simpler than that of Tsallis et al. generalized RayleighJeans law. with a qdependent prefactor.e. CONCLUSIONS Although the generalized distribution functions are ﬁrst introduced in 1993.which is the generalized StefanBoltzmann law. StefanBoltzmann law and Wien law) transform to corresponding standard wellknown laws in the q → 1 limit. It is also possible to obtain the generalized Wien shift law.05 we have found hνm /kT = 2. Lastly. since not necessarily q ∼ 1 (it = will have a meaning. From the graphical solution.(19) in ref. if a physical system requiring this condition exists). generalized Planck law.347. there has been no attempt to apply them to the physical systems until a very recent eﬀort performed by Pennini et al.08. In this letter. the graphical solution is adequate for our purpose.[24] gives hνm /kT = 2. respectively. [24] (since the procedure is completely the same with that followed in standard textbooks of Statistical Physics for the derivation of standard Planck law) and also the bound seems to be more general.95 and q = 1. kT (23) Although it is very diﬃcult to ﬁnd an analytical solution for this equation. of course.
C. 8 .ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors acknowledge TUBITAK and Ege University for making Prof. Tsallis’ visit to Izmir possible. Tsallis for the helpful discussions as well as kindly supplying to us some of the references therein. We are very indebted to Prof. C.
Physica A199 (1993) 137. [11] A. Phys. [13] F. Landsberg. A197 (1995) 209. [7] E. Bacry. General Relativity and Gravitation 19 (1987) 375.M. A. Hughes. J. Demirhan and A. Nuovo Cimento 11 (1989) 907. [4] R. Demirhan. A165 (1992) 409. Phys. 32 (1983) 209. B¨y¨kkılı¸ and D. J. Tsallis and E.F. [10] A. D. Plastino and A. Stat. 43 (1980) 547. G¨le¸. Mariz. [12] A. 1985) p. Curado. [2] P. da Silva. Salzberg.L. Prog. Tsallis. Phys. Stat. Corrigenda: 24 (1991) 3187.F. J.217 . Tsallis. 52 (1988) 479. Lett. J. Lett. Tsallis.R. B317 (1993) 523. de Mello.F. Rep. Phys. A175 (1993) 169 and 171. Lett. Lett.M. Ramshaw. Stat. Chame and E. A177 (1993) 177.F. Kraichnan and D. Physica A175 (1991) 285. Physica A202 (1994) 438.R. Lett. Phys. [3] M.W.[1] A. A24 (1991) L69. u u c [14] F. Phys.M.M. Curado and C. A203 (1994) 486. C. Lett.C. Shlesinger. J. D. Phys. [5] H. Phys. Andrade.P.T. Plastino. Gravitational Physics of Stellar and Galactic Systems (Cambridge University Press. 203 (1994) E160.H. Phys. Phys. 35 (1984) 159. Phys. [6] C. J. u u c u c [15] E.S.M. Montroll and M. Ito and C. Montgomery. Phys. Phys. Shlesinger and B.F. [8] N.D. Saslaw. 25 (1992) 1019. 6 (1965). Plastino. A181 (1993) 24.D. Physica A109 (1981) 597. Cambridge. W. A27 (1994) 3663. Plastino and A. J. Pavon. Math. 9 . E. [9] R. B¨y¨kkılı¸.
Tsallis. ”Generalization of the MeanField Ising Model u u c within Tsallis Thermostatistics”. Lett.H. [25] D. de Souza and R. Physica A213 (1995) 337. Plastino. Rev. in press. preprint. Alemany. A174 (1993) 384. in ”Levy Flights and Related Phenomena in Physics”. M. in press. 75 (1995) 3589. Tsallis. Stariolo. Zanette. Tsallis.IV International Conference on Squeezed States and Uncertainty Relations (FICSSUR95. Zanette. [29] A.D. in press. Phys. Phys. Physica B212 (1995) 309.H. [21] S. Physica A. D. 1995). Portesi and A. Maynard. Sarmento. Zaslavsky (Springer. [28] S.A.M. Rev. Loh. A. G. Phys. Alemany and D. Physica A (1996). Physica A218 (1995) 482.1995). 10 . C. China) NASA Conference Publication Series (Dec. B¨y¨kkılı¸.R. Plastino and C. [27] A. [22] E. Lett. [23] F. Tsallis. Kaniadakis. Tırnaklı. Berlin. Phys. in press. M. [18] F. Plastino. page 269.K. Quarati. Demirhan and U. Phys Rev E52 (1995) 1447. Lett. Nobre and C. Phys. Frisch and G. E49 (1994) R956.F. 74 (1995) 1048.F. D.M. Demirhan. J. Rajagopal. Curilef and C. Phys. [20] F. A. Plastino and M.C. J. Eds. Phys.C. Proc. [30] P. u u c [19] A. F. A185 (1994) 262.D. B¨y¨kkılı¸ and D. Lett. Lett. Zanette and P. Maynard.C. B99 (1995) 137. A. Lavagno and P. Portesi. Levy.[16] D. Lett.R. Z. Tsallis. Sa Barreto and E. Rev. [26] A. A. Physica A215 (1995) 542.V. Phys. C.A. U. Tsallis.H. Physica A223 (1996) 87. Plastino and C. Phys. Tsallis.M. Phys. 75 (1995) 366. A26 (1993) L893. [24] C. [17] A. Taiyvan. A27 (1994) 5707. ”Generalized Fractional Statistics”.A. Souza and R. S. Plastino. Plastino and A. Shlesinger. Rev. A (1996).F. Curilef.
[33] G. Lifshitz.R. Rev.. Kaniadakis.D. J. Plastino and A. [39] F. in ”Chaos. Astrophys.A. Guerberoﬀ and G.R. L. Phys. G.A.C. [38] J. E53 (1996) 4754. preprint. Lucena. 11 .M. Lavagno and P. Sanchez (Plenum Press. Phys. Marshall (Pergamon Press. [35] G. Raggio. J. 37 (1996) 1776. Phys. A. A. Solitons and Fractals”.A. [32] B. Tsallis. ”Polynomial expansion of diﬀusion and drift coeﬃcients for classical and quantum statistics”. da Silva and C. Raggio. J. Math. Lett. Tsallis. Phys. G.[31] L. Phys.L. Boghosian. P. Pury and G. Raggio. [34] C. Mather et al. 1985). Plastino. Math. Quarati. 37 (1996) 1790. Kaniadakis and P.R.S. page 451. Magnetic Materials and their Applications”.R. A208 (1995) 309. MoranLopez and J.M. Phys. Phys. Quarati. Oxford. page 539. 420 (1994) 439. J. 36 (1995) 4785. Eds. Math. Guerberoﬀ.A. 1994). [36] G. [37] L. J. Pennini.M. Landau and E. G. Rev. ”Statistical Physics”. New York. Third ed. in ”New Trends in Magnetism. Lett. Ed. 1994). (Pergamon Press. E51 (1995) 6247. B369 (1996) 308.
FIGURE CAPTIONS Blackbody photon energy density per unit volume versus hν/kT in the frame of this work and ref. 12 .[24].
[24]) q=1 1.0 0 1 2 3 hν/kT 4 5 6 13 .5 Dq(ν)h2c3/8πk3T3 q=1.5 0.05 (ref.Fig.0 q=0.05 (This Work) 1.95 (ref.1 2.[24]) q=0.0 q=1.95 (This Work) 0.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?