Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Journal of Physics A Mathematical and General

Algebraic aspects of quantum statistics

E. Celeghini, Mario Rasetti, Giuseppe Vitiello

Published Mar 21, 1997• 9 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Consistent implementation of the additivity of physical observables in second quantization uniquely establishes quantum statistics. In this scheme the usual Weyl - Heisenberg algebra induces Maxwell - Boltzmann distribution, while Bose - Einstein statistics are related to su (1,1).
DOI
10.1088/0305-4470/30/6/003

Related papers

Generalized statistics and the algebra of observables

Jon Magne Leinaas

A short review is given of how to apply the algebraic Heisenberg quantization scheme to a system of identical particles. For two particles in one dimension the approach leads to a generalization of the Bose and Fermi description which can be expressed in the form of a 1/x^2 statistics interaction between the particles. For an N-particle system it is shown how a particular infinite-dimensional algebra arises as a generalization of the su(1,1) algebra which is present for the two-particle system.

arXiv:hep-th/9611167•Nov 21, 1996•6 citations

IDENTICAL PARTICLES AND PERMUTATION GROUP

E. Celeghini, Mario Rasetti, Giuseppe Vitiello

Second quantization is revisited and creation and annihilation operators areshown to be related, on the same footing both to the algebra h(1), and to the superalgebra osp(1|2) that are shown to be both compatible with Bose and Fermi statistics. The two algebras are completely equivalent in the one-mode sector but, because of grading of osp(1|2), differ in the many-particle case. The same scheme is straightforwardly extended to the quantum case h_q(1) and osp_q(1|2).

•May 21, 1994•7 citations

Identical particles and permutation group

E Celeghini, M Rasetti, G Vitiello

Second quantization is studied. Creation and annihilation operators are shown to be related on the same basis to both the algebra h(1) and to the superalgebra osp(1/2) which are shown to be compatible with both Bose and Fermi statistics. The two algebras are completely equivalent in the one-mode sector but, because of the grading of osp(1/2), differ in the many-particle case. The possibility of an unorthodox quantum field theory is suggested.

arXiv:hep-th/9405139•Journal of Physics A Mathematical and General•Apr 21, 1995•8 citations

Distribution Functions in Physics and Mathematics Why Fermi–Dirac and Bose–Einstein Balance Equations are not Distributions from an Axiomatic Perspective

Pascal Moser

The term ‘Verteilungsfunktion’ (distribution function) is used in physics as a semantic container for at least four ontologically distinct mathematical objects: proper probability density functions (PDFs), probability mass functions (PMFs), expectation values of occu-pation numbers, and phase-space measure densities. This conflation arose historically because the statistical mechanics of Boltzmann, Maxwell, Fermi, Dirac and Bose predates Kolmogorov’s axiomatic probability theory (1933) by decades; no systematic back-mapping was ever performed. The central finding concerns the Fermi–Dirac and Bose–Einstein functions specifically: they are not merely mislabeled — they are relative measurements, bounded observable expectation values ⟨nk⟩-normalised against their capacity. Each of the five objects routinely called a ‘distribution function’ is audited against the Kolmogorov taxonomy: the Maxwell–Boltzmann speed distribution is a proper PDF that is merely mislabeled; the Boltzmann canonical distribution is a genuine probability measure; the Boltzmann-transport phase-space density is normalised toNrather than to unity; and the Fermi–Dirac and Bose–Einstein functions are occupation-number expectation values that acquire physical meaning only as convolution kernels against the density of states. A short supporting section shows that this is not an accident of two particular formulas. One elementary theorem establishes that a bounded occupation of capacityMunder Boltz-mann weighting with an additive constraint yields⟨n⟩M= −d ln ZM/dx; atM=1 this is exactly the logistic function, and at M→∞it diverges. Fermi–Dirac and Bose–Einstein are therefore the two branches of a single construction, which is why the first is bounded in [0, 1]and the second admits no bounded normalisation at all. The same unit-capacity form appears outside physics wherever a bounded quantity accumulates additive evidence, which suggests that such objects are best read as relative measurements against a capacity rather than as distributions. The paper reconstructs the historical sequence that produced the terminological divergence and proposes notational conventions to restore conceptual clarity in pedagogy and literature. Keywords: probability density function, distribution function, Fermi–Dirac, Bose–Einstein, Maxwell–Boltzmann, Kolmogorov, Jaynes, ontology, statistical mechanics, probability theory, quantum statistics, foundations of physics,philosophy of science, physics education, information theory, thermodynamics.

•Aug 3, 2026•0 citations

Quantum Statistics for Distinguishable Particles

J. Tersoff, David Bayer

Quantum statistics can be reconciled with such classical ideas as distinguishable particles. Bose-Einstein and Fermi-Dirac statistics are derived for distinguishable particles by making an assumption regarding probabilities which is different from the traditional assumption but equally reasonable.

Physical Review Letters•Feb 21, 1983•68 citations

Bose-Einstein versus Maxwell-Boltzmann distributions

P. Enders, Ahornallee Senzig

The reply by Sands & Dunning-Davies [3] to my paper [1] is acknowledged concerning the distribution functions. Keywords: Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution, Bose-Einstein distribution, classical ensembles, state functions In my paper ‘Are there physical systems obeying the Maxwell-Boltzmann statistics?’[1] I have written down the well-known probabilities of the 4 possible results of one fair toss of 2 fair coins according to the Maxwell-Boltzmann (MB), Bose-Einstein (BE) and Fermi-Dirac (FD) statistics. The two results coin 1 = head, coin 2 = tail and coin 2 = head, coin 1 = tail are counting as different in MB and as one and the same in BE and in FD. Then, I have quoted Gibbs [2], that the interchange of two © 2011 C. Roy Keys Inc. — http://redshift.vif.comApeiron, Vol. 18, No. 1, January 2011 16

•Jan 1, 2011•1 citation
The term ‘Verteilungsfunktion’ (distribution function) is used in physics as a semantic container for at least four ontologically distinct mathematical objects: proper probability density functions (PDFs), probability mass functions (PMFs), expectation values of occu-pation numbers, and phase-space measure densities. This conflation arose historically because the statistical mechanics of Boltzmann, Maxwell, Fermi, Dirac and Bose predates Kolmogorov’s axiomatic probability theory (1933) by decades; no systematic back-mapping was ever performed. The central finding concerns the Fermi–Dirac and Bose–Einstein functions specifically: they are not merely mislabeled — they are relative measurements, bounded observable expectation values ⟨nk⟩-normalised against their capacity. Each of the five objects routinely called a ‘distribution function’ is audited against the Kolmogorov taxonomy: the Maxwell–Boltzmann speed distribution is a proper PDF that is merely mislabeled; the Boltzmann canonical distribution is a genuine probability measure; the Boltzmann-transport phase-space density is normalised toNrather than to unity; and the Fermi–Dirac and Bose–Einstein functions are occupation-number expectation values that acquire physical meaning only as convolution kernels against the density of states. A short supporting section shows that this is not an accident of two particular formulas. One elementary theorem establishes that a bounded occupation of capacityMunder Boltz-mann weighting with an additive constraint yields⟨n⟩M= −d ln ZM/dx; atM=1 this is exactly the logistic function, and at M→∞it diverges. Fermi–Dirac and Bose–Einstein are therefore the two branches of a single construction, which is why the first is bounded in [0, 1]and the second admits no bounded normalisation at all. The same unit-capacity form appears outside physics wherever a bounded quantity accumulates additive evidence, which suggests that such objects are best read as relative measurements against a capacity rather than as distributions. The paper reconstructs the historical sequence that produced the terminological divergence and proposes notational conventions to restore conceptual clarity in pedagogy and literature. Keywords: probability density function, distribution function, Fermi–Dirac, Bose–Einstein, Maxwell–Boltzmann, Kolmogorov, Jaynes, ontology, statistical mechanics, probability theory, quantum statistics, foundations of physics,philosophy of science, physics education, information theory, thermodynamics.
The reply by Sands & Dunning-Davies [3] to my paper [1] is acknowledged concerning the distribution functions. Keywords: Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution, Bose-Einstein distribution, classical ensembles, state functions In my paper ‘Are there physical systems obeying the Maxwell-Boltzmann statistics?’[1] I have written down the well-known probabilities of the 4 possible results of one fair toss of 2 fair coins according to the Maxwell-Boltzmann (MB), Bose-Einstein (BE) and Fermi-Dirac (FD) statistics. The two results coin 1 = head, coin 2 = tail and coin 2 = head, coin 1 = tail are counting as different in MB and as one and the same in BE and in FD. Then, I have quoted Gibbs [2], that the interchange of two © 2011 C. Roy Keys Inc. — http://redshift.vif.comApeiron, Vol. 18, No. 1, January 2011 16