Talk:Fermi-Dirac statistics

Is the word "statistics" plural? I think so, but Florian Marquardt introduced some grammar suggesting it's singular. He also left in some of my plural forms, leaving the article sounding rather confused. I've changed it to be consistently plural. If anyone knows better please say so.

Also, F-D statistics are used for electrons in solids, not just electrons generally. In free space, you don't usually need QM, and inside atoms or molecules, you need non-statistical QM. -- Tim Starling

Electrons can be be found in other forms than 'in solids' or 'in free space', there are in every (non-solid/non gas) molecule also.

Oh really? Perhaps that's why I wrote above "inside atoms or molecules, you need non-statistical QM". I guess there could be applications for F-D statistics for electrons in molecular or atomic gases – perhaps at high temperatures – but informing me smugly that there are electrons in liquids and gases is probably not the best way to start such a discussion.

Sorry, I had not intention of being sarcastic or offending, I just wanted to state that solid-state physics]] is not the only field where F-D apply; i.e. F-D seems to be used in dense-matter physics, white-dwarf[?] & neutron star are also (but not so good) example. - looxix 22:36 Mar 3, 2003 (UTC)

I didn't mean to suggest that F-D statistics can never be used for liquids or gases. I thought the statement "F-D statistics applies in particular to the electrons and therefore are often used in the study of solids" was misleading. It implies that anything containing electrons is suitable for study with F-D statistics. This is certainly untrue. -- Tim

F-D statistics is not only used for electrons in solids, in fact, a metal conductor is better interpreted as a 'gas' of electrons embedded in a solid mesh/lattice (see Fermi gas).

The "gas" analogy may be a useful one, but it does miss some of the more curious properties of solids. Although a small fraction of the electrons in a metal are free to move and respond to external forces (like the particles of a classical gas), not all of them are. Why not? -- Tim

I didn't say that all electrons are part of the "gas". - looxix 22:36 Mar 3, 2003 (UTC)

also F-D (as B-E) statistics apply to indistinguishable particle, if the electrons are bound in a solid, then they are distinguishable.

of course I may be totaly wrong. - looxix 22:14 Mar 2, 2003 (UTC)

About that last point, yes unfortunately you are "totaly wrong". Electrons are always indistinguishable. See identical particles for a sketchy explanation. -- Tim Starling 04:29 Mar 3, 2003 (UTC)

Indeed, I confounded with nuclei in a crystal. - looxix 22:36 Mar 3, 2003 (UTC)