Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T17:05:56.491Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Discussion: The Foundations of Statistical Mechanics—Questions and Answers*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Amit Hagar
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Huw Price (1996, 2002, 2003) argues that causal-dynamical theories that aim to explain thermodynamic asymmetry in time are misguided. He points out that in seeking a dynamical factor responsible for the general tendency of entropy to increase, these approaches fail to appreciate the true nature of the problem in the foundations of statistical mechanics (SM). I argue that it is Price who is guilty of misapprehension of the issue at stake. When properly understood, causal-dynamical approaches in the foundations of SM offer a solution for a different problem; a problem that unfortunately receives no attention in Price's celebrated work.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 72 , Issue 3 , July 2005 , pp. 468 - 478
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

‡

I thank William Demopoulos, Steven Savitt, and two anonymous referees who pointed out to me ambiguities and errors in earlier drafts, and the audience of the 12th Foundations of Physics Conference in Leeds, UK (2003), where the ideas appearing here were first presented. Financial aid from the University of British Columbia Graduate Fellowship and the St. John's College Reginald and Annie Van Fellowship, as well as from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, the Federal Ministry of Education and Research and the Program for the Investment in the Future (ZIP) of the German Government through a Sofja Kovalevskaja Award is gratefully acknowledged.

References

Albert, David (1994), “The Foundations of Quantum Mechanics and the Approach to Thermodynamic Equilibrium”, The Foundations of Quantum Mechanics and the Approach to Thermodynamic Equilibrium 45:669–677.Google Scholar
Albert, David (2000), Time and Chance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blatt, J. M. (1959), “An Alternative Approach to the Ergodic Problem”, An Alternative Approach to the Ergodic Problem 22:745–756.Google Scholar
Boltzmann, Ludwig ([1871] 1968), “Einige Allegmeine Sätze über Wärmegleichegewicht”, reprinted in F. Hasenoerl and J. A. Barth (eds.), Wissenschaftliche Abhandlungen, vol. 1. New York: Chelsea, 259–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boltzmann, Ludwig ([1895] 1964), Lectures on Gas Theory. Reprint. Translated by Steven G. Brush. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borel, Emile (1914), Le Hasard. Paris: Alcan.Google Scholar
Brush, Steven G. (1976a), “Irreversibility and Indeterminism: Fourier to Heisenberg”, Irreversibility and Indeterminism: Fourier to Heisenberg 37:603–630.Google Scholar
Brush, Steven G. (1976b), The Kind of Motion We Call Heat, vols. 1 and 2. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Brush, Steven G. (1983), Statistical Physics and the Atomic Theory of Matter. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Burbury, Samuel H. (1894), “Boltzmann’s Minimum Function”, Boltzmann’s Minimum Function 51: 78.Google Scholar
Callender, Craig (2004), “Measures, Explanations, and the Past: Should ‘Special’ Initial Conditions Be Explained?”, Measures, Explanations, and the Past: Should ‘Special’ Initial Conditions Be Explained? 55:195–217.Google Scholar
Earman, John, and Redei, Miklos (1996), “Why Ergodic Theory Does Not Explain the Success of Equilibrium Statistical Mechanics”, Why Ergodic Theory Does Not Explain the Success of Equilibrium Statistical Mechanics 47:63–78.Google Scholar
Emch, Gerard, and Liu, Chang (2002), The Logic of Thermo-Statistical Physics. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farquhar, I. E. (1964), Ergodic Theory in Statistical Mechanics. London: Interscience Publishers.Google Scholar
Feynman, Richard. (1965), The Character of Physical Law. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gallavotti, Giovanni (1999), Statistical Mechanics. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghirardi, GianCarlo, et al. (1986), “Unified Dynamics for Microscopic and Macroscopic Systems”, Unified Dynamics for Microscopic and Macroscopic Systems 34:470–491.Google ScholarPubMed
Goldstein, Sheldon (2001), “Boltzmann’s Approach to Statistical Mechanics”, in Bricmont, Jean et al. (eds.), Chance and Physics. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 39–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemmo, Meir, and Shenker, Orly (2001), “Can We Explain Thermodynamics by Quantum Decoherence?”, Can We Explain Thermodynamics by Quantum Decoherence? 32:555–568.Google Scholar
Hemmo, Meir, and Shenker, Orly (2003), “Quantum Mechanics without Collapse, Decoherence, and the Second Law of Thermodynamics”, Quantum Mechanics without Collapse, Decoherence, and the Second Law of Thermodynamics 70:330–358.Google Scholar
Jaynes, Edwin T. (1983), Papers on Probability, Statistics, and Statistical Physics. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
Klein, Martin (1973), “The Development of Boltzmann’s Statistical Ideas”, in Cohen, E. G. D. and Thirring, W. (eds.), The Boltzmann Equation-Theory and Application. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 53–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leeds, Stephen (1989), “Malament and Zabel on Gibbs’ Phase Averaging”, Malament and Zabel on Gibbs’ Phase Averaging 56:325–340.Google Scholar
Loewer, Barry (2001), “Chance and Determinism”, Chance and Determinism 32:609–620.Google Scholar
Maxwell, James C. ([1867] 1911), “Catechism on Demons”, reprinted in C. G. Knott (ed.), Life and Scientific Work of Peter Guthrie Tait. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 213–215.Google Scholar
Maxwell, James C. (1879), “On Boltzmann’s Theorem of the Average Distribution of Energy in a System of Material Points”, On Boltzmann’s Theorem of the Average Distribution of Energy in a System of Material Points 12: 547.Google Scholar
Price, Huw (1996), Time’s Arrow and Archimedes’ Point. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Price, Huw (2002), “Boltzmann’s Time Bomb”, Boltzmann’s Time Bomb 53:83–119.Google Scholar
Price, Huw (2003), “Burbury’s Last Case: The Mystery of the Entropic Arrow”, in Callender, Craig (ed.), Time, Reality and Experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 19–56.Google Scholar
Schrödinger, Erwin (1950), “Irreversibility”, Irreversibility 53:189–195.Google Scholar
Shenker, Orly (2000), “Interventionism in Statistical Mechanics—Some Philosophical Remarks”, University of Pittsburgh PhilSci Archive, http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00000151/.Google Scholar
Sklar, Lawrence (1993), Physics and Chance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolman, Richard (1938), The Principles of Statistical Mechanics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Von Plato, Jan (1991), ‘Boltzmann’s Ergodic Hypothesis’, Archive for the History of Exact Science 42:71–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar