home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: sci.physics
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!mips!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ucla-cs!ucla-ma!news
- From: barry@arnold.math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman)
- Subject: Re: the nature of exclusion
- Message-ID: <1992Aug20.021152.23111@math.ucla.edu>
- Sender: news@math.ucla.edu
- Organization: UCLA, Mathematics Department
- References: <1992Aug19.130152.15632@newstand.syr.edu>
- Date: Thu, 20 Aug 92 02:11:52 GMT
- Lines: 35
-
- In article <1992Aug19.130152.15632@newstand.syr.edu> middle@npac.syr.edu (A.
- Middleton) writes:
- > In article <1992Aug18.214628.9544@math.ucla.edu>, barry@arnold.math.ucla.edu
- (Barry Merriman) writes:
- > >but then that implies as I compress in space I expand in
- > >momentum, which would seem to imply ther temperature goes up.
- > > ...
- >
- > More momentum does not necessarily mean higher temperature. Zero
- > temperature means putting the fermions in the lowest energy state
- > POSSIBLE. Since the lowest energy state is one electron of each
- > spin in each momentum state, the ground state has kinetic energy.
- > This kinetic energy will grow as the box shrinks.
-
- Ok, but one would like to understand this in physical, causal
- terms if possible. I mean, yes there is that _relation_, but can
- we go one step further and develop a casual chain of the form
-
- exclusion principle -> "statistical repulsion" -> more energy in ground
- state as it is spatially compressed.
-
- and actually understand the physical mechanism of the stat repulsion?
- Maybe not, but it would sure be nice if one could have an intuition
- about it, rather than just accepting it.
-
-
-
-
- --
- Barry Merriman
- UCLA Dept. of Math
- UCLA Inst. for Fusion and Plasma Research
- barry@math.ucla.edu (Internet; NeXTMail is welcome)
-
-
-