Paper detail

On the power-law q-distribution function based on the probabilistically independent postulate in nonextensive statistics

We deal with the power-law q-distribution functions, so-called q-exponentials in nonextensive statistics. The system considered is a many-body Hamiltonian system with arbitrary interacting potentials. We find that the usual form of power-law q-distribution function employed in nonextensive statistics for the system may be not to stand by the probabilistically independent postulate and it only represents a dynamical isothermal situation. The probabilistically independent postulate is validated by the nonextensivity (or pseudoadditivity) in nonextensive statistics and thus the usual forms of power-law q-distribution function have to be modified. In this letter, we present a new power-law q-distribution based on the probabilistically independent postulate, which can represent nonequilibrium stationary state of the system away from equilibrium and with the nonextensive energy.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Authors

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.