Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T06:38:18.108Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Problem of Irreversibility

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2022

John Earman
John Earman*
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The nature and basis of irreversibility has been intensively investigated over the last 100 years by physicists, mathematicians, and philosophers. But if progress is measured by convergence of opinion among the “experts” then it is hard to detect; in fact the field is a virtual Tower of Babel. J.L. Lebowitz, one of the leading mathematical physicists in the field put it this way:

I do not know if anyone is making bets on the eventual resolution of the apparent paradoxes relating to the coexistence, in the description of the same phenomena, of both determinism and randomness, reversibility and time asymmetry, and so on. If there are people betting, however, I would be very happy to be the banker and keep the money until everyone has agreed on the answer. (Lebowitz 1983, p. 4)

Type
Part VI. Physics
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1986 , Issue 2: Volume Two: Symposia and Invited Papers 1986 , 1986 , pp. 226 - 233
Copyright
Copyright © 1987 by 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

1

I am grateful to A. Janis and L. Sklar for helpful discussions on these matters.

References

Courbage, M. (1983) “Intrinsic Irreversibility of Kolmogorov Dynamical Systems.” Physica 122A: 459-482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Courbage, M. and Prigogine, I. (1983) “Intrinsic Randomness and Intrinsic Irreversibility in Classical Dynamical Systems.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 80: 2412-2416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HoUinger, H.B. and Zenzen, M.J. (1985) The Nature ofirreversibility. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horton, C.W., Reichl, L.E., and Szebehely (eds.). (1983) Long Time Predictions in Dynamics. New York, NY: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
Jaynes, E.T. (1965). “Gibbs vs. Boltzmann Entropies.” American Journal of Physics 33: 391-398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaynes, E.T. (1983) Papers In Probability, Statistics and Statistical Mechanics. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
Kubo, R., Toda, M, and Hashitsume, N. 1985. Statistical Physics II: Nonequilibrium Statistical Mechanics. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lanford, O.E. (1975) “Time Evolution of Large Classical Systems.” In Dynamical Systems. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. Edited by Moser, J.. Pages 144-177.Google Scholar
Lanford, O.E. (1976) “On A Derivation of the Boltzmann Equation.” Asterique 40: 117-137. (As reprinted in Lebowitz, J. (ed.). Non-Equilibrium Phenomena I. The Boltzmann Equation. Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1983. Pages 3-17.)Google Scholar
Lavis, D.A. and Milligan, P.J. (1985) “The Work of E.T. Jaynes on Probability, Statistics and Statistical Mechanics.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 36: 193-210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lebowitz, J.L. (1972) “Hamiltonian Flows and Rigorous Results in Nonequilibrium Statistical Mechanics.” In Statistical Mechanics, New Concepts, New Problems, New Applications. Edited by Rice, S.A., Freed, K.F. and Light, J.C.. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Pages 41-63.Google Scholar
Lebowitz, J.L. (1983) “Microscopic Dynamics and Macroscopic Laws.” In C.W. Horton et. al. (1983). Pages 3-19.Google Scholar
Malament, D. and Zabell, S. (1980) “Why Gibbs Phase Space Averages Work-The Role of Ergodic Theory.” Philosophy of Science 47: 339-349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markus, L. and Meyer, K. (1974) Generic Hamiltonian Systems Are Neither Integrable Nor Ergodic. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Misra, B. and Prigogine, I. (1983) “Time, Probability, and Dynamics.” In C.W. Horton, et. al. (1983). Pages 21-43.Google Scholar
Oxtoby, J.C. and Ulam, S.M. (1941) “Measure Preserving Homeomorphisms and Metrical Transitivity.” Annals of Mathematics 42: 847-920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penrose, O. (1979) “Foundations of Statistical Mechanics.” Reports on Progress in Physics 42: 1937-2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penrose, R. (1981) “Time Asymmetry and Quantum Gravity.” In Quantum Gravity 2. Edited by Isham, C.J., Penrose, R. and Sciama, D.W. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Pages 244-272.Google Scholar
Prigogine, I. (1980) From Being to Becoming. San Francisco, CA: W.H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Prigogine, I. (1984) Order Out of Chaos. New York, NY: Bantom Books.Google Scholar
Sklar, L. (1987). “The Elusive Object of Desire:” In Pursuit of the Kinetic Equation and the Second Law. In this volume.Google Scholar
van Beijeren, H., Lanford, O.E., Lebowitz, J.L. and Spohn, H. (1980) “Equilibrium Time Correlation Functions in the Low-Density Limit.” Journal of Statistical Physics 22: 237-257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Kampen, N.G. (1971) “The Case Against Linear Response Theory.” Physica Norwegica 5: 279-284.Google Scholar