arxiv: v1 [cond-mat.stat-mech] 14 Mar 2018

Transcription

1 The statstcs of mesoscopc systems and the physcal nterpretaton of extensve and non-extensve entropes D. V. Anghel 1 and A. S. Parvan 1,2,3 1 Insttutul Natonal de Fzca s Ingnere Nucleara Hora Hulube, Magurele, Romana arxv: v1 cond-mat.stat-mech4 Mar Bogolubov Laboratory of Theoretcal Physcs, Jont Insttute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russa and 3 Insttute of Appled Physcs, Moldova Academy of Scences, Chsnau, Republc of Moldova The postulates of thermodynamcs were orgnally formulated for macroscopc systems. They lead to the defnton of the entropy, whch, for a homogeneous system, s a homogeneous functon of order one n the extensve varables and s maxmzed at equlbrum. We say that the macroscopc systems are extensve and so t s also the entropy. For a mesoscopc system, by defnton, the sze and the contacts wth other systems nfluence ts thermodynamc propertes and therefore, f we defne an entropy, ths cannot be a homogeneous of order one functon n the extensve varables. So, mesoscopc systems and ther entropes are non-extensve. Whle for macroscopc systems and homogeneous entropes the equlbrum condtons are clearly defned, t s not so clear how the nonextensve entropes should be appled for the calculaton of equlbrum propertes of mesoscopc systems for example t s not clear what s the role played by the boundares and the contacts between the subsystems. We propose here a general defnton of the entropy n the equlbrum state, whch s applcable to both, macroscopc and mesoscopc systems. Ths defnton stll leaves an apparent ambguty n the defnton of the entropy of a mesoscopc system, but ths we recognze as the sgnature of the anthropomorphc character of the entropy see Jaynes, Am. J. Phys. 33, 391, 1965). To exemplfy our approach, we analyze four formulas for the entropy two for extensve and two for non-extensve entropes) and calculate the equlbrum canoncal) dstrbuton of probabltes by two methods for each. We show that these methods, although wdely used, are not equvalent and one of them s a consequence of our defnton of the entropy of a compound system. PACS numbers: 05.; m; r I. INTRODUCTION reversblty of a process. Nevertheless, as Jaynes ponted out 2], the entropy has an ntrnsc anthropomorphc nature and s nfluenced by the observer. The concept of entropy, central to thermodynamcs, was ntroduced n the nneteenth century to descrbe the For a large class of systems that we call extensve evoluton of systems to equlbrum see, for example, systems), the entropy s addtve: f two systems are n Ref. 1], whch ncludes a very nce hstorcal perspectve). The entropy S s a functon of state and org- entropy of system 2, then the entropy of the total sys- equlbrum, S 1 s the entropy of system 1 and S 2 s the nally referred to macroscopc systems, consstng of a tem 1 + 2) s S 1+2 = S 1 + S 2 and t does not depend large number of partcles comparable to the Avogadro s on the contact or, mplctly, the absence of contact) between the systems. Ths s the case of systems n whch number). In any reversble process, S remans constant, whereas n rreversble processes t always ncreases. The the boundares and the nterfaces between subsystems are varaton ofentropy S s consdereda measureof the r- rrelevant at equlbrum and therefore the system may be

2 2 regarded as beng composed of ndependent subsystems n equlbrum. A consequence of ths property s the fact that the entropy s a homogeneous functon of order 1 n the extensve parameters. If we denote by E the nternal energy of the system, by X X 1,X 2,...) the set of all the other extensve parameters that defne the state of the system, and by λ a postve constant, then S s homogeneous of order 1 f SλE,λX) = λse,x). The extensve systems are analyzed n the context of the Gbbsan thermostatstcs1, 3], whch was later extended by Rény 4, 5]. The mesoscopc systems.e. systems n whch fnte sze effects play an mportant role, lke nano-systems, nucle, or systems composed of astronomcal objects), whch are ntensely studed nowadays, are non-extensve,.e. f system 1 and system 2 are n contact and n equlbrum wth each other t does not matter, for the present dscusson, what knd of contact exsts between the systems) and then we solate them wthout changng ther extensve parameters E.X ) = 1,2) assumng we can do that, the entropy may change; that s, the entropy of the system 1 + 2), when system 1 and system 2 are solated, may be dfferent from the sum of the entropes of the parts S 1 + S 2. If, for solated systems, S 1+2 > S 1 + S 2, the entropy s sad to be superaddtve, whereas f S 1+2 < S 1 + S 2 the entropy s called subaddtve 6, 7]. Therefore, the physcal propertes of mesoscopc systems are nfluenced besde ther extensve parameters) by ther szes, ther contacts wth other systems, etc. For ths reasons, the entropy cannot have an unversal expresson n terms of the extensve parameters, but should be adapted to descrbe specfc types of systems, wth specfc nteractons wth the envronment. The am of ths paper s to provde a general method, applcable to both, extensve and non-extensve entropes, for the calculaton of the equlbrum probablty dstrbuton of a system over ts mcrostates. Frst, we dentfy three methodshypotheses) for the calculaton of the equlbrum probablty dstrbutons, whch we apply to four well known expressons of for the entropy: the Boltzmann-GbbsBG), RényR), Havrda-Charvát- Daroczy-Tsalls ), and Landsberg-Vedral LV) entropes. Two of these entropes are extensve BG and R), whereas the other two are non-extensve and LV). We shall establsh the relatons between the three methods, to see whch of them are physcally justfed and generally applcable. The paper s organzed as follows. In Secton II we ntroduce the methods and the four entropes BG, R,, and LV. In Secton III we apply the methods to the entropes and analyze the results. In Secton IV we draw the conclusons. II. GENERAL METHODS For the statstcal descrpton of the entropy n both, extensve and non-extensve systems), we need the mcrostates of the system. The mcrostates most commonly used are the egenstates of the total Hamltonan of the system. These mcrostates wll be numbered by,j = 0,1,... and we denote by p the probablty to fnd the system n state. The entropy s defned as a functon of the set of probabltes {p }, so we can wrte S S{p }). The average of any quantty A, whch s a functon of the mcrostate, s defned as A A p. 1) There are several proposals for the functon S S{p }). For extensve systems but not only), the most commonly used are the Gbbs and Boltzmann entropes 8 10]. We do not comment here on whch of these two expressons s preferable see, for example, Refs. 2, 11 19] for a heated dscusson), but we shall call t the Boltzmann-Gbbs entropy and wrte S BG k B p lnp. 2) The expresson 2) s a partcular case a lmt of a more

3 3 general addtve entropy due to Rény 4, 5] S R q = k B ln pq ). 3) For non-extensve systems, the stuaton s more complcated, as we explaned before. In ths paper we shall analyze the Havrda-Charvát-Daroczy-Tsalls ) entropy 6, 10, 20 22] S q = k B p q 1 p q 4) and the Landsberg-Vedral entropy 7] Sq LV = k B 1 1 ; 5) n the expressons 3), 4), and 5), q s postve parameter and one can easly check that S BG {p }) = lm q=1 S R q {p }) = lm q=1 S HCTD q {p }) = lm q=1 S LV q {p }). For solated systems mcrocanoncal ensemble), the entropes 2)-5) are maxmzed f all accessble mcrostates are equally probable 4 7, 22]. Ths means that f we denote by Ω ΩE,X) the number of accessble mcrostates for fxed external parameters E, X), then p = 1/Ω = constant for any. Therefore, we may wrte the entropy as a functon of E,X), namely SE,X) S{p = 1/ΩE,X)}], where S may take any of the expressons 2)-5). Furthermore, let us assume that system 1, wth probablty dstrbuton {p 1) }, and system 2, wth probablty dstrbuton {p 2) j }, are solated from each-other. Then, the probablty to fnd system 1 n the state and system 2 n the state j s p 1+2) j = p 1) p 2) j statstcal ndependence). The entropy of the composed system 1 + 2) s a functon of the composed probabltes, S 1+2 {p 1+2) j }). If each of these two systems s n mcrocanoncal condtons.e. they are solated from each-other and from the envronment), wth the external parameters E 1,X 1 ) for system 1) and E 2,X 2 ) for system 2), then all the mcrostates of the composed system 1 + 2) are equprobable, namely p 1+2) j = 1/Ω 1 E 1,X 1 )Ω 2 E 2,X 2 )], where Ω 1+2 = Ω 1 E 1,X 1 )Ω 2 E 2,X 2 ) s the total number of accessble states n the system 1+2). If systems 1 and 2 nteract, so that they can exchange some of ther external parameters, then the probabltes {p 1) } and {p 2) j } are not ndependent anymore and Ω 1+2 s n general dfferent from Ω 1 E 1,X 1 )Ω 2 E 2,X 2 ). Consderng ths, we may magne three general methods to maxmze the entropy of a compound system, dependng on ts physcal propertes. The frst method M1) s the most commonly used and s generally but not only) appled to extensve systems. In ths case, the number of states n a system s determned by ts external parameters E,X) and does not depend on the contacts wth other systems. For E,X) fxed, all accessble mcrostates ΩE, X) are equprobable and the entropy s S{p = 1/ΩE,X)}] SE,X). Let s assume that system 1 and system 2, of parameters E 1,X 1 ) and E 2,X 2 ), respectvely, are brought nto contact and they can exchange energy. In ths case, the fxed parameters are X 1, X 2, and the total energy E t E 1 + E 2. Then, the entropy of the total system 1 + 2) s calculated from the probabltes of all accessble mcrostates n the solated systems 1 and 2, for all possble values of E 1 and E 2 : S 1+2,M1 E t,x 1,X 2 ) = S{p 1+2)M1 j E t,x 1,X 2 )}], 6a) where the mcrostate, of system 1, corresponds to the external parameters E 1,X 1 ), the mcrostate j, of system 2, corresponds to the external parameters E t E 1,X 2 ), and E 1 takes all the physcally possble values. The total number of states n the system 1+2) s Ω 1+2,M1 E t,x 1,X 2 ) E 1 Ω 1 E 1,X 1 )Ω 2 E t E 1,X 2 ), 6b) where the summaton s taken over all possble values of E 1. Snce the system 1 + 2) s solated, all accessble states are equprobable and the probabltes of the mcrostates are p 1+2)M1 j E t,x 1,X 2 ) = 1/Ω 1+2,M1 E t,x 1,X 2 ). 6c)

4 4 The probabltes 6c) should determne the value of the entropy of the compound system. In practce, Eq. 6c) does not represent the fnal answer for the equlbrum probablty dstrbuton. If ths were the case, then we could not dstngush between the entropes of equlbrum and non-equlbrum confguratons, because all would be gven by the probabltes6c). At ths pont, an observercomes nto play. If, after mergng system 1 and system 2, the system 1 + 2) s solated and cannot be observed, we do not know anythng about the evoluton towards equlbrum and Eq. 6c) represents our knowledge. Nevertheless, n general, we observe that the system 1 + 2) evolves towards equlbrum and remans there, eventually the extensve parameters of the subsystems havng some small) fluctuatons around the equlbrum values. We denote the average values by U 1 E 1 and U 2 E 2 = E t U 1 and assume that they are the same as the most probable values. The probablty that system 1 and system 2 have the energes E 1 and E t E 1 s PE 1 ) = Ω 1 E 1,X 1 )Ω 2 E t E 1,X 2 )/Ω 1+2,M1 E t,x 1,X 2 ). Assumng that PE 1 ) s a contnuous and dfferentable functon of E 1, then U 1 and U 2 are calculated from the condton of maxmum probablty, whch mples dpe 1 ) de 1 Ω 1E 1,X 1 )Ω 2 E t E 1,X 2 )] E 1 Ω 1+2,M1 E t,x 1,X 2 )] 1 = 0, 6d) lnω 1 E 1,X 1 )] E 1 = lnω 2E 2,X 2 )] E1=U 1 E 2 1/ M1 ) β M1. E2=U 2=E t U 1 Equaton 6e) defnes the temperature of the system for the frst method, T M1. We see also that n dervng Eqs. 6d) and 6e) we assumed that system 1 and system 2 are not further dvded nto subsystems and ther own evolutons towards equlbrum are not taken nto consderaton.e. they are not observed. Iftheszeofoneofthesesystemsncreasestonfnty, t becomes a reservor and one of the solutons for ths case 6e) s always the Gbbs probablty dstrbuton n the system that remans fnte, no matter what s the defnton of the entropy 2)-5), as we shall see n Secton IIIA). The second method M2) s due to Jaynes 8], who appled t to the Boltzmann-Gbbs entropy 2). Later, Tsalls appled t to the entropy 6]. So, let s assume that the system under study s n contact wth a heat reservor. Then, ts energy s not fxed, but t has n equlbrum a well defned average value. Jaynes proposed that the equlbrum probablty dstrbuton s the one that maxmzes the entropy, under the constrant of fxed average energy maxmum entropy prncple). Introducng the Lagrange multpler 1/T M2, where T M2 plays the role of temperature, one fnds the equlbrum value of E from the maxmzaton of the Masseu) functon Equaton 7a) mples that Ψ max E SE,X) E/T M2]. SE, X) E = 1 T M2 and may be extended to any type of reservor 8]. 7a) 7b) The frst and the second methods are not equvalent. They gve the same result for Boltzmann-Gbbs entropy 2), but not for the other three 3)-5), as we shall see n the next sectons. We propose here a thrd method M3). Let s suppose agan that we have system 1 and system 2, of parameters E 1,X 1 ) and E 2,X 2 ), respectvely. As before, for fxed external parameters, all the accessble states n each of the systems are equprobable, namely p 1) = 1/Ω 1 E 1,X 1 ) and p 2) j = 1/Ω 2 E 2,X 2 ). These probabltes defne the entropes S 1 {p 1) }) S 1 E 1,X 1 ) and S 2 {p 2) j }) S 2 E 2,X 2 ), butalsotheentropyofthecompoundsystem 1+2),S 1+2 {p 1) p 2) j }). Let s assume now that the systems are brought nto contact and that they can exchange energy, so that E t E 1 +E 2 = constant. Then, the entropy of the compound system 1 + 2) s

5 5 defned as S 1+2,M3 E t,x 1,X 2 ) = max E 1 S 1 E 1,X 1 )+S 2 E t E 1,X 2 )]. 8a) If S 1 and S 2 are contnuous functons of E 1 and E 2, respectvely, the maxmum s obtan when S 1 E 1,X 1 ) E 1 1 T 1,M3 = S 2E 2,X 2 ) E 2 1 T 2,M3, 8b) whch s the Zeroth Prncple of Thermodynamcs and ntroduces the noton of temperature for ths method. When one of the systems s a reservor.e. s very large n comparson to the other system), ts temperature s fxed and Eq. 8a) reduces to Eq. 7a), whch proves that the second method s a corollary of the thrd method. The thrd method provdes also a physcal nterpretaton of the second method. Apparently, the thrd method ntroduces a degree of arbtrarness n the defnton of the entropy, because t dfferentate between a compound system and an solated one. In an solated system, the entropy s calculated drectly from the probablty dstrbuton over the mcrostates, whch s a constant dstrbuton. In a compound system, e.g. a system formed of two subsystems n thermal contact, the entropy s calculated by the maxmzaton of the sum of the entropes of the two systems. Therefore, although the compound system s tself solated from the envronment, apparently, ts entropy s not calculated from the probablty dstrbuton over ts mcrostates. Ths contradcton s only apparent, snce we do not know how the number of mcrostates s changed when we put n contact two systems whch are ntally solated. If the entropy s properly chosen, e.g. by fttng t wth relevant expermental data, then the procedure presented n Eqs. 8) allows one to estmate the number of mcrostates accessble n the compound system. Ths also shows that the thrd method s qualtatvely dfferent from the frst method where the number of mcrostates n system 1+2), when system 1 and system 2 are n contact, s gven by 6b) and n non-extensve systems leads to dfferent results. Ths s the reason for whch, as we shall see, the second method, whch may be derved form the thrd method, gves dfferent results from the frst method. Therefore, the assumpton that both M1 and M2 are correct n nonextensve systems 6, 7] may lead to contradctons. In the next secton we shall compare the results of the frst and the second method, appled to the entropes 2)- 5). We shall show that only the Boltzmann-Gbbs entropy 2) gves the same result by both methods. Ths means that the thrd method as mpled by the second method) leads to the standard results, when appled to macroscopc systems. The Rény entropy 3), even though t s dentcal to the Boltzmann-Gbbs entropy n solated systems, gves dfferent results by M1 and M2. III. CANONICAL ENSEMBLE PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTION Let us calculate the probablty dstrbuton over the mcrostates of a system n contact wth a heat reservor, by employng the frst and the second methods, to compare the results. A. Applcaton of the frst method Let us assume that system 1 s n contact wth a heat reservor R. We denote the parameters of the system by E 1,X 1 ) and the parameters of the reservor by E R,X R ). The total system t, whch s composed by the system 1 and the reservor, s solated and has the energy E t = E 1 +E R. Thenumberofmcrostatesn thesystem t s Ω t E t,x 1,X R ), each mcrostate wth the probablty p t)m1 j = 1/Ω t E t,x 1,X R ) as gven by Eqs. 6). Then, the probablty p 1)M1 E 1,X 1 ) to fnd the system 1 n the mcrostate, of energy E 1, s obtaned by summng p t)m1 j over all states j of the reservor whch are compatble wth. Snce the states j correspond to the energy

6 6 E R = E t E 1, we have p 1)M1 E 1,X 1 ) = p t)m1 j E t,x 1,X R )Ω R E t E 1,X R ) = Ω RE t E 1,X R ) Ω t E t,x 1,X R ), 9) where Ω R E t E 1,X R ) s the number of states of energy E R = E t E 1 n the reservor. We observe n Eq. 9) that the probablty p 1)M1 ndependent of our choce of entropy 2)-5). Eventually, our choce of entropy wll nfluence the dependence of p 1)M1 on E 1, f we assume that the entropy of the reservor S R vares lnearly wth E 1 : S R E R,X R ) = S R E t,x R ) S RE R,X R ) E R s E 1 ER=E t S R E t,x R ) E 1 T. 10) For Boltzmann-Gbbs entropy 2) we obtan whch mples S BG R = k B lnω R E R,X R )], Ω R E R,X R ) = e SBG R ER,XR)/kB e SBG R E t,x R ) The temperature, n ths case, s k E 1 B k BT. 11a) SR BGE R,X R ) = 1 E R T 1 11b) T M1 see Eq. 6e) and combnng Eqs. 9), 11a), and 11b) we obtan the well-known results p 1)BG,M1 E 1,X 1 ) = e E1/kBTM1) Z M1 BG M1 e E1/kBTM1). and 11c) M1 s a normalzaton constant n ths case s the partton functon and by E 1 we always denote the energy of the state of the system 1,.e. t s the shorthand notaton of E 1 ). Smlarly, n the Rény statstcs 3) one can easly check that S R R = k BlnΩ R E R,X R )], so Ω R R E R,X R ) = e SR R ER,XR)/kB. Repeatng the calculatons 11), we obtan p 1)R,M1 E 1,X 1 ) = e E1/kBTM1). 12) M1 For the entropy, from Eq. 4) we have S R Ω R = = k B Ω R 1 ) 1+ SR k B and 13a) ) 1/). 13b) In ths case, we can make two hypotheses. In the frst hypothess, we assume that M1 ) 1 lnω R )]/ E R s a constantfor any accessblevalues of E R = E t E 1 Abe etal.23]andtoral24]consderthatt 1M sthe physcal temperature, eventually due to ts physcal nterpretaton Eqs. 6) and ts dentfcaton wth the Boltzmann temperature Eq. 11b). Under ths assumpton, t follows mmedately that lnω R ) = E R M1 +C, 13c) where C s a constant of ntegraton. Pluggng 13c) nto Eq. 9) and usng E R = E t E 1, we recover the same exponental dependence on energy of the probablty dstrbuton, p 1),M1 as n Eqs. 11) and 12). E 1,X 1 ) = e E1/kBTM1) M1, 13d) In the second hypothess we employ Eq. 10), namely, we assume that T 1 R, S R / E R s constant for any accessble E R = E t E 1. From Eq. 13b) we obtan Ω R E R,X R ) = 1 SR E R k B E R = Ωq R E R,X R ) R,, whch, after ntegraton, gves 1+ ) q/) SR k B Ω R E t,x R ) Ω R E R,X R ) = E t E R R, whch can be wrtten as 14a) Ω R E t E 1,X R ) = Ω R E t,x R ) )E 1 1 R, Ω R E. 14b) t,x R ) Pluggng 14b) nto 9), we obtan the probablty dstr-

7 7 buton p 1),M1 E1,X 1 ) = 1 where Z M1 1 Z M1 )E 1 R, Ω R E t,x R ), 14c) s a normalzaton constant and Ω R E t,x R ) s a parameter whch has to be determned from expermental observatons the ft of the probablty dstrbuton on energy). When q 1, Ω R E t E 1,X R ) and p 1),M1 E 1,X 1 ) converge to and Ω R E t E 1,X R ) = Ω R E t,x R )e E 1 M1 p 1),M1 E1,X 1 ) = e E1/kBTM1) M1 whch s the expected Boltzmann-Gbbs lmt. 14d) 14e) For the Landsberg-Vedral entropy, the relaton between the entropy and the number of accessble states s SR LV = k B Ω R = 1 Ω R 1 SR LV k B ) and ) 1. 15a) 15b) We make agan two hypotheses, lke for the entropy. The frst hypothess s that T M1 s constant and we obtan agan the Gbbs dstrbuton, lke n 11c), 12), and 13d): p 1)LV,M1 E 1,X 1 ) = e E1/kBTM1). 15c) M1 The second hypothess s that T 1 R,LV SLV R / E R s constant and we obtan Ω R E R,X R ) E R = Ω2 q R E R,X R ) R,LV. Applyng the same procedure as n Eqs. 14), we obtan Ω R E t E 1,X R ) = Ω R E t,x R ) q 1)E 1 1 R,LV Ω R E. 16a) t,x R ) Equaton 16a) gves p 1)LV,M1 E1,X 1 ) = 1 1 Z M1 LV q 1)E 1 R,LV Ω R E t,x R ), 16b) where Z M1 LV s a normalzaton constant and Ω RE t,x R ) has to be determned from expermental observatons lke n the case of the entropy). In the lmt q 1, Ω R E t E 1,X R ) and p 1)LV,M1 E 1,X 1 ) converge to the Boltzmann-Gbbs expressons, and Ω R E t E 1,X R ) = Ω R E t,x R )e E 1 M1 p 16c) 1)LV,M1 E1,X 1 ) = e E1/kBTM1) M1. 16d) B. Applcaton of the second method In ths secton we apply the second method 6, 8, 22] to calculate the probablty dstrbuton of system 1 n contact wth a heat reservor R of temperature T the canoncal ensemble). System 1 s descrbed by one of the entropes 2)-5). In order to do ths, we solve Eq. 7a), wth the constrant p = 1. 17) The Boltzmann-Gbbs entropy 2) leads to p 1)B,M2 = 1 M2 Z M2 BG = e E/kBT), where e E/kBT) Z M1 BG. 18a) 18b) We observe that the probablty dstrbuton and the partton functon 18) are dentcal to the ones obtaned by the frst method 11), as expected. For the Rény entropy 3), we obtan by the second method 25, 26] p 1)R,M2 = 1 ZR M2 and Z M2 R = 1+q 1) Λ R E 1+q 1) Λ R E 19a), 19b)

8 8 where ) Z M2 q R = χ and χ p 1)R,M2 ) q. 19c) From the Eqs.19) above we obtan a selfconsstent equaton for Λ R, = 1 q 1+q 1) Λ R E 1+q 1) Λ ] q R E. 19d) We see that the dstrbuton 19d), whch s derved from the condton 8b), s dfferent from the dstrbuton 12), whch s derved from the condton 6e). For the entropy 4) one obtans 6, 22, 27, 28] p 1),M2 = 1+ q 1 q Λ E where Λ satsfes the equaton 1+ q 1 Λ E = 1. q, 20a) 20b) In the Tsalls statstcs, one can also defne generalzed expectaton values 6, 22, 27, 29, 30] by A q = A p q. 21) In ths case, the probablty dstrbuton functon and ensemble averages are 22, 31] p 1),M2,q = Z M2 = 1 Z M2 1 ) E 1 ) E.,22a) 22b) We observethat the energydependence ofp 1),M2 Eq.22a)recoverstheenergydependenceofp,q 1),M1 Ec. 14c) f T T R, Ω R E t,x R ) and Z M2 Z M1. These equatons are smlar n form, but the expectaton values are dfferent. Applyng the second method to the Landsberg-Vedral entropy 5), we obtan 32] p 1)LV,M2 = 1 ZLV M2 Z M2 LV = 1+q 1) Λ LV E 1+q 1) Λ LV E, 23a), 23b) where ) Z M2 q LV = χ 2 and χ p 1)LV,M2 ) q. 23c) FromEqs. 23) we fnd aself-consstentequaton forλ LV, = 1+q 1) Λ LV E { q 1/2 1+q 1) Λ ] q } 2 q+1 LV E.23d) We observe that the energy dependence of p 1)LV,M2 Eq. 23a) resembles the energy dependence of p 1)LV,M1 Ec. 16b). To better understand ths resemblance, we defne ω 1+q 1) Λ LV, whch, f plugged nto 23a), leads to p 1)LV,M2 = ω ZLV M2 1 q 1) E ω 24a).24b) Equatons 16b) and 24b) are smlar n form, but snce the quanttes Ω R E t,x R ) and ω aredfferent the condton 23d) mposed on Λ LV and therefore on ω s not necessary for Ω R E t,x R )), the probablty dstrbutons are also dfferent, as we antcpated n Secton I. Furthermore, we can also see from Eqs. 13a) and 15a) that by the frst method the relaton S 1+2,M1 E t,x 1,X 2 ) = S 1 E 1,X 1 )+S 2 E 2,X 2 ) +γs 1 E 1,X 1 )S 2 E 2,X 2 )25) s always satsfed where γ = 1 q)/k B for the entropy and γ = )/k B for the LV entropy 6, 7] and ths s n contradcton wth Eq. 8a) of M3. IV. CONCLUSIONS In ths paper we analyzed the extensve Boltzmann- Gbbs Eq. 2) and Rény Eq. 3) entropes, together wth the non-extensve Havrda-Charvát-Daroczy-Tsalls Eq. 4) and Landsberg-Vedral entropes Eq. 5). We calculated the canoncal dstrbutons by two methods. In

9 9 the frst method M1) we assumed statstcal ndependence of the systems, that s, f system 1 and system 2, of extensve parameters E 1,X 1 ) and E 2,X 2 ), respectvely, are n contact and n equlbrum, then the number of accessble mcrostates n the total system 1+2) s Ω 1+2 = Ω 1 E 1.X 1 )Ω 2 E 2.X 2 ), where Ω 1 E 1,X 1 ) and Ω 2 E 2.X 2 ) are the number of states n system 1 and system 2, respectvely. Inthesecond method M2)weassumedthatthecanoncal equlbrum probablty dstrbuton over the mcrostates s the one that maxmzes the entropc thermodynamc potental, that s, maxmzes the entropy under the restrcton that the average energy s fxed. We have shown that the two methods are not equvalent and they gve the same result only for the Boltzmann-Gbbs statstcs. We have also shown that the second method s related to the prncple of addtvty of entropy called the thrd method n the text). We proposed that the entropy should be defned n general.e. for both, extensve and non-extensve systems) such that, when system 1, of parameters E 1,X 1 ), and system 2, of parameterse 2,X 2 ), areputntothermalcontact,theentropyof thecomposedsystem 1+2)becomesS 1+2 E t,x 1,X 2 ) max E 1 S 1 E 1,X 1 )+S 2 E t E 1,X 2 )], where E t E 1 + E 2. The second method s a corollary of the thrd method t s the thrd method, when one of the systems s a reservor and these two are dfferent from the frst method, whch s wdely used n macroscopc thermodynamcs. Therefore we conclude that the prncple of addtvty of entropy provdes a physcal foundaton for both, extensve and non-extensve statstcs, for the method of maxmzaton of the entropc thermodynamc potental, and s of general applcablty n both, macroscopc and mesoscopc systems. On the other hand, t overrules the prncple of statstcal ndependence of the probablty dstrbutons over the mcrostates, whch s applcable only for solated systems and s just a convenent approxmaton n macroscopc systems whch are n contact. Acknowledgments: Ths work was supported n part by Romana-JINR collaboraton projects. DVA was supported by the ANCS project PN / ] Laszlo Tsza. Generalzed Thermodynamcs. The M.I.T. Press, Massachusetts Insttute of Technology, Cambrdge, Massachusetts., ] E. T. Jaynes. Am. J. Phys., 33:391, ] I. Prgogne and R. Defay. Chemcal Thermodynamcs by] I. Prgogne and R. Defay. Longmans, Green, London, ] A. Reny. Proc. Fourth Berkeley Symposum of Mathematcal Statstcs and Probablty, 1:547, ] A. Reny. Probablty Theory. North Holland, Amsterdam, ] C. Tsalls. J. Stat. Phys., 52:479, ] P. T. Landsberg and V. Vedral. Phys. Lett. A, 247:211, ] E. T. Jaynes. Phys. Rev., 106:620, ] E. T. Jaynes. Phys. Rev., 108:171, ] A. Wehrl. Rev. Mod. Phys., 50:221, ] J. Dunkel and S. Hlbert. Nat. Phys., 10:67, ] S. Hlbert, P. Hängg, and J. Dunkel. Phys. Rev. E, 90:062116, ] Mchele Camps. Phys. Rev. E, 91:052147, ] D. Frenkel and P. B. Warren. Am. J. Phys., 83:163, ] R.H.SwendsenandJ.-S. Wang. Phys. Rev. E,92:020103, ] Anghel, D. V. EPJ Web of Conf., 108:02007, ] R. H. Swendsen and J.-Sh. Wang. Physca A, 453:24, ] M. Matty, L. Lancaster, W. Grffn, and R. H. Swendsen. Physca A, 467:474, ] E. Abraham and O. Penrose. Phys. Rev. E, 95:012125, ] J. Havrda and F. Charvát. Kybernetka, 3:30, ] Z. Daroczy. Inf. Control, 16:36, ] C. Tsalls, R.S. Mendes, and A.R. Plastno. Physca A,

10 10 261:534, ] S. Abe, S. Martínez, F. Pennn, and A. Plastno. Phys. Lett. A, 281:126, ] R. Toral. On the defnton of physcal temperature and pressure for nonextensve thermostatstcs. Physca A, 317:209, ] A.S. Parvan andt. S. Bró. Phys. Lett. A, 340:375, ] A.S. Parvan and T.S. Bró. Phys. Lett. A, 374:1951, ] A. Plastno and A.R. Plastno. Phys. Lett. A, 226:257, ] A. S. Parvan. Phys. Lett. A, 360:26, ] E. M. F. Curado and C. Tsalls. J. Phys. A, 24:L69, ] E. M. F. Curado and C. Tsalls. J. Phys. A, 25:1019, ] K. K. Gudma, A. S. Parvan, M. P loszajczak, and V. D. Toneev. Phys. Rev. Lett., 85:4691, ] A. S. Parvan. arxv: cond-mat.stat-mech].