Talk:Fermi–Dirac statistics

message: Dead link: http://www.boutichesaid.cv.dz/FermiDirac/FermiDirac.htm  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joey11 (talk • contribs) 11:27, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link report 

message: In the derivation that I just added, when I use a Windows based computer with non-Safari browsers, the alignment is Ok for all the equations, i.e. they are aligned by keeping the equals sign in the same place on each line.  The Windows/non-Safari  computer was the one that I used when I was aligning. However, when I use a MAC and Safari browser, some of the equations become misaligned. There seems to be a shifting of the lines which  might be related to the use of ::: and/or hard spaces at the beginning of the line and its interaction with the TeX markup, but I'm not sure. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to get consistent alignment on both types of computers/browsers? Thanks. --Bob K31416 (talk) 11:07, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect you're the one responsible for the things I commented on below.  If you're using something external to TeX to make it align correctly, then you're doing it wrong.  All those preceeding colons for spacing is absolutely wrong; you should be working WITHIN TeX to do that.  The "align" environment is used in TeX for alignment of "="s on different lines.  They way you (if it was you) did it is lunacy; it's a horrible mess. Michael Hardy (talk) 22:30, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Equation positioning 

message: Recently there were a considerable number of changes to the article. Some of these changes introduced outright physics errors, most did not improve the article, and they were accompanied by rude and untruthful remarks. These included unsubstantiated accusations of violation of Wikipedia style guidelines. If the editor insists on including these changes, consensus will be needed on this talk page through  civil discussion.  --Bob K31416 (talk) 12:23, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edits by Michael Hardy  

message: The article says n_i is the "average number of fermions in the state i", which is wrong. Either an N (total number of fermions in the system) is missing in the numerator, or the given n_i is the probability that a fermion is in the state i.--190.188.10.179 (talk) 15:16, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: See  p. 339 of the source Reif, where  \bar{n}_s  is defined for quantum distribution functions. "Let us now consider the case of arbitrary temperature T and calculate, for the several cases of interest, the mean number of particles  \bar{n}_s  in a particular state s." --Bob K31416 (talk) 13:37, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: FD distribution

message: The first graph in this article does not show an average, but a probability. Of course, the two are linked but obviously not the same. The Physics-writer D.C. Giancoli talks about "an occupation-probability" and Hyperphysics mentions "a probability that a particle has energy E". It makes me even more suspicious about the use of an average number in this article. But correct me if I'm wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koitus~nlwiki  (talk • contribs) 22:11, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: See Talk:Fermi–Dirac_statistics#FD_distribution. The given source Reif derives the Fermi-Dirac Distribution  as an average occupation, not a probability of occupation. However, in this case of the Fermi-Dirac Distribution  the maximum number of particles in a state is one and the average equals the probability. Compare with the Bose-Einstein Distribution where the  average occupation can be greater than 1 and thus not equal to the probability. Bob K31416 (talk) 22:55, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Average number