This chapter has two goals. The first is to develop the quantum version of multiplicity. That will show us how entropy is expressed in quantum theory. The second goal is to develop a general quantitative definition of temperature. Entropy plays a key role in that definition. The density of states When a physical system has reached thermal equilibrium, its macroscopic properties do not change with time. In quantum theory, the energy eigenstates of an isolated system provide predictions and estimates that are constant in time; therefore such states are appropriate for a quantum description of thermal equilibrium. To be sure, the information at hand will not enable us to select a single state as uniquely the correct state to use. We will be driven to consider many states and to form sums over them. This section develops a mathematical technique for working with such sums. When the system is both isolated and of finite size (as we shall specify here), the energy eigenstates form a discrete set, whose members we can arrange and label in order of increasing energy. (If any two distinct states happen to have the same energy, we just assign them consecutive labels.) Typically, the states will be densely spaced in energy, and so a sum over a range of states can often be approximated adequately by an integral with respect to energy, provided that we have constructed an appropriate density of states : a function that specifies the number of energy eigenstates per unit energy interval.
This chapter has two goals. The first is to develop the quantum version of multiplicity. That will show us how entropy is expressed in quantum theory. The second goal is to develop a general quantitative definition of temperature. Entropy plays a key role in that definition. The density of states When a physical system has reached thermal equilibrium, its macroscopic properties do not change with time. In quantum theory, the energy eigenstates of an isolated system provide predictions and estimates that are constant in time; therefore such states are appropriate for a quantum description of thermal equilibrium. To be sure, the information at hand will not enable us to select a single state as uniquely the correct state to use. We will be driven to consider many states and to form sums over them. This section develops a mathematical technique for working with such sums. When the system is both isolated and of finite size (as we shall specify here), the energy eigenstates form a discrete set, whose members we can arrange and label in order of increasing energy. (If any two distinct states happen to have the same energy, we just assign them consecutive labels.) Typically, the states will be densely spaced in energy, and so a sum over a range of states can often be approximated adequately by an integral with respect to energy, provided that we have constructed an appropriate density of states : a function that specifies the number of energy eigenstates per unit energy interval.
Investigation on foundational aspects of quantum statistical mechanics recently entered a renaissance period due to novel intuitions from quantum information theory and to increasing attention on the dynamical aspects of single quantum systems. In the present contribution a simple but effective theoretical framework is introduced to clarify the connections between a purely mechanical description and the thermodynamic characterization of the equilibrium state of an isolated quantum system. A salient feature of our approach is the very transparent distinction between the statistical aspects and the dynamical aspects in the description of isolated quantum systems. Like in the classical statistical mechanics, the equilibrium distribution of any property is identified on the basis of the time evolution of the considered system. As a consequence equilibrium properties of quantum system appear to depend on the details of the initial state due to the abundance of constants of the motion in the Schrodinger dynamics. On the other hand the study of the probability distributions of some functions, such as the entropy or the equilibrium state of a subsystem, in statistical ensembles of pure states reveals the crucial role of typicality as the bridge between macroscopic thermodynamics and microscopic quantum dynamics. We shall consider two particular ensembles: the random pure state ensemble and the fixed expectation energy ensemble. The relation between the introduced ensembles, the properties of a given isolated system, and the standard quantum statistical description are discussed throughout the presentation. Finally we point out the conditions which should be satisfied by an ensemble in order to get meaningful thermodynamical characterization of an isolated quantum system.
Historically, thermodynamics was formulated for macroscopic systems followed by the development of statistical mechanics which provided microscopic formulations for quantities such as entropy. Entropy is traditionally linked to the ln of the number states available or to the Shannon’s form -k Sum over i P(ei) ln(P(ei)) where P(ei) is the probability for the quantity ei. In addition a variable T (linked to average kinetic energy) appears in both theories. Later the Schrodinger equation was developed to describe bound electron states in an atom etc. These states were characterized by a math object W(x) called the wavefunction and a set of discrete energy levels was calculated which matched data of emitted photons. In a previous note (1) we argued that the average energy En for a quantum bound state plays the same role of characterizing equilibrium as T in classical thermodynamics/statistical mechanics. We further argued that En is linked to parameters in the system. For example, for a particle in a box with infinite potential walls, En is linked to L as well as to n the energy level. One may change En by either changing n or L separately (or both). Holding L constant and changing n leads to a certain type of energy change. We argue this is similar to holding the volume of a gas constant and increasing T. Alternatively, one may leave n unchanged (a quantum adiabatic process) and change L i.e. a mechanical change or work. We argue that one may already consider the concept of the first law of thermodynamics at the quantum bound state level i.e. dE = dQ - dWork where Work is linked to a change in a physical parameter, such as L the length of the box, whereas dQ is linked to energy changes not involving a physical parameter e.g. a change in n the energy level. The Schrodinger equation yields solutions for W(x)=Sum over p a(p)exp(ipx) the wavefunction as well as En’s. We have argued in previous notes that W(x) is part of a conditional probability P(p/x)= a(p)exp(ipx)/W(x) and that En is constant at each point x just as T is constant at each x for classical statistical equilibrium (1). Thus a kind of statistical mechanics exists at the wavefunction level we argue. This statistical mechanics makes use of a free particle wavefunction exp(ipx) and weights a(p), but does not contain the usual P(x), P(p) picture of the classical world. We have shown in (2) that one may obtain P(x)=W*(x)W(x) and P(p)=a*(p)a(p) from the conditional probability. The essential physics we argue, however, is at the level of the wavefunction together with its own unique statistical scenario of exp(ipx)’s interacting with exp(ikx)’s from V(x)=Sum over Vkexp(ikx) (see (1)). Given that P(x) and P(p) exist for a quantum bound state, it may be convenient to use them in formulas because they are linked to a classical statistical picture. We argue that one may use P(x) and P(p) to construct an object S such that T dS does not change when one changes L, the size of box with infinite potential walls. We argue that such an object follows from properties of the Schrodinger equation together with various assumptions. We arrive at S=Sp+Sx where Sp=-k Integral dp a(p)a(p) ln{|a(p)a(p)}| and Sx= -k Integral dx W(x)W(x) ln(W(x)W(x)) for a given energy level. We do not use arguments related to taking ln of the number of states present or Shannon’s entropy. Rather we look for a solution which does not depend on L and is additive. We note, however, that for both W(x)W(x) and a(p)a(p) the solution found is mathematically consistent with the entropy form found by considering independent probabilities. This, however, applies to P(x) and P(p), but we argue that the physical situation is based on W(x) and a(p) as solutions of the Schrodinger equation. Nevertheless P(x) and P(p) are physical observables and not simply math constructs and so may think of them in a somewhat classical manner in terms of probability. Thus we argue that thermodynamics is already present at the level of a quantum bound state and that one may obtain Shannon’s entropy at this level using P(x) and P(p), but without considering the overall probability of independent probabilities as in information theory or numbers of states. Rather obtaining a function which is additive in Sp and Sx and eliminates L is the main consideration. We also argue that S=Sp+Sx carries over into mixed quantum state wavefunctions even though it is usually ignored. Thus we try to argue that it is the bound quantum state which gives rise to the notion of thermodynamics and entropy.
The quantum state contains all accessible information about a system. However, for various reasons, the information is less complete than we might expect given the classical states we are used to. This suggests the possibility that the state itself contains a measure of entropy (lack of information), which could potentially arise in two ways. Firstly, quantum states contain an inherent uncertainty with respect to the measurement outcomes of conjugate variables. Secondly, due to limitations in the preparation process, we may not be sure which state a system is occupying. The best we can do in this situation is to assign each potential state a classical probability and construct a specialist mathematical representation to deal with the situation. This is known as the density matrix. It turns out to be a rather handy tool in general and crucial for the exploration of quantum entropy. So, in this chapter, we are going to extend our technical understanding of quantum theory and the representation of states. This will arm us sufficiently to venture into the physics of the measurement problem and the entropy of quantum systems, which we will tackle in Chapter 12 .
Shannon’s entropy: -k Sum over i P(i) ln(P(i)) is expressed in terms of P(i) the probability for state i. If entropy exists as a concept separated from the first law of thermodynamics with dWork=0, then it is not clear what set of states i should be taken in quantum mechanics. In classical statistical mechanics, each particle is automatically described by its position and momentum vectors for no internal motion. For example a pure energy eigenstate wavefunction Wn(x) may be written in terms of many different orthonormal mathematical basis sets e.g. Wn(x)= Sum over i bi phi(i)(x) with probabilities bi*bi. Thus one may create many types of entropy expressions using Shannon’s form without any other physical considerations. For example, W(x)=Sum over p a(p)exp(ipx) and one may create Sp which is usually done in the literature. In previous notes we have argued that Sn = Sp(n)+Sx(n). For a particle in a box with infinite potential walls, Sx(n)=Sx. The sum of the two entropies ensures that the parameter L (box size) vanishes so that a quantum adiabatic transformation is isentropic. Thus a consideration other than Shannon’s form has been used to obtain Sn=Sp(n)+Sx for a particle in a box. Furthermore one may argue Shannon’s form even for a pure state based on S=S1+S2 where 1 and 2 represent two systems. A question still remains: Why are Sx and Sp entropies used and not some other set? Furthermore for a system with several energy levels ei one might ask why -Sum over i P(ei)ln(P(ei)) is used as in (1)? In a previous note (2) we considered that Shannon’s form of entropy follows from dE= TdS (dWork=0) with dE=Sum over i ei dP(ei). Furthermore we argued that P(ei) = C(T)exp(-ei/T) is a solution, but so is C(T) exp(-ei/T) exp(Si) where Si=Sx,i + Sp,i for the pure bound state. In other words, specific states related to the physical situation are chosen and entropy constructed from dE=TdS to reflect this. In this note we argue that entropy may be less related to counting arrangements than to considering the issues involved in energy transfers within a system.
We consider the temporal evolution of the entropy S of an isolated system from an initial non-equilibrium state 2· of entropy S = S i to the equilibrium state of maximum entropy S = S max > S i. The application of usual density matrix theory of quantum mechanics leads us to the surprising result P = dS/dt = 0. The entropy does not change in time. This result is valid in case of the equilibrium state. However it is wrong for a non-equilibrium state, because the entropy of the isolated system could not spontaneously increase from S i to S max by entropy production P > 0. This contradicts the second law of thermodynamics. We avoid this discrepancy by changing from quantum mechanics to quantum thermodynamics. Now the entropy production P = dS/dt and the time t are the relevant observables. In order to treat the temporal development of S and P, we at first prepare an initial state i of entropy production P i at time t < 0. Subsequently at ϑ t ≥ 0 the initial state i interacts with a continuum of final states f, which transfers the entropy production from i to f. The temporal evolution of the entropy production P(t) of our system is treated by means of the time-dependent perturbation theory. For that reason we split the operator of entropy production P = P 0 + W into two parts. The operator P 0 describes the unperturbed basic vectors of entropy production | i > and | f >, while the perturbation operator W determines the interaction between | i > and | f >. We expand the time-dependent state function < t | ψ > of the isolated system into the complete set of stationary eigenvectors | i > and | f > and calculate the time-dependent expansion coefficients c i(t) and c(f, t) by means of the dynamic equation of quantum thermodynamics − i k (d/dt) < t | ψ > = < t | P | ψ >. Here k means the Boltzmann constant, which is characteristic of quantum thermodynamics and represents the atomic entropy unit. The expansion coefficients are given by a system of coupled differential equations, from which we deduce an integral-differential equation for the coefficient c i(t) of the initial state i. Unfortunately it has been impossible to obtain an analytic solution of the complicated equation. However approximations are available. Accordingly, in the vicinity of the equilibrium state, the probability of still finding the initial state i of entropy production P i at time t is given by ω i(t) = | c i(t) |2 = exp (−Lt). The rate constant L ≥ σ depends on the density ρ(P f) of final states f of entropy production P f near by P i, and on the squared modulus of the perturbation matrix elements W if = < i | W | f >, which determines the interaction between | i > and | f >. The entropy production P(t) = P i ω i(t) = P i exp (−ϑLt) of the isolated system decreases exponentially and irreversibly with proceeding time t. Its rate-determining step is the transfer of entropy production from i to f. The integral over the entropy production of the final states f vanishes. Therefore the continuum states f do not contribute to the total entropy production P(t). The temporal evolution of the entropy S(t) can easily be calculated by integration of P(t). In conclusion, the entropy production of a non-equilibrium state is finite P(t) > 0 and only vanishes in the case of the equilibrium state P(∞) = 0. Thus, quantum thermodynamics agrees with the second law of thermodynamics.
Von Neumann's macroscopic entropy definition is not wholly satisfactory because (a) it rests on an unsatisfactory characterization of macroscopic variables, (b) it fails to make satisfactory connection with the Nernst heat theorem, (c) it is based on an unsatisfactory definition of thermal equilibrium, (d) it is not applicable to microscopic systems. It is proved that if two systems initially in independent states are placed in thermal contact and isolated, the sum of their microscopic entropies cannot decrease, but will in general increase. This theorem is a substitute for the usual rule regarding the increase in entropy of a single isolated system. Appreciable departures from the canonical state are shown to have a vanishingly small probability in the case of a system subjected to the thermostat experimental procedure described in a preceding paper.