David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Foundations of Science 11 (4):323-347 (2006)
The foundation of statistical mechanics and the explanation of the success of its methods rest on the fact that the theoretical values of physical quantities (phase averages) may be compared with the results of experimental measurements (infinite time averages). In the 1930s, this problem, called the ergodic problem, was dealt with by ergodic theory that tried to resolve the problem by making reference above all to considerations of a dynamic nature. In the present paper, this solution will be analyzed first, highlighting the fact that its very general nature does not duly consider the specificities of the systems of statistical mechanics. Second, Khinchin’s approach will be presented, that starting with more specific assumptions about the nature of systems, achieves an asymptotic version of the result obtained with ergodic theory. Third, the statistical meaning of Khinchin’s approach will be analyzed and a comparison between this and the point of view of ergodic theory is proposed. It will be demonstrated that the difference consists principally of two different perspectives on the ergodic problem: that of ergodic theory puts the state of equilibrium at the center, while Khinchin’s attempts to generalize the result to non-equilibrium states
|Keywords||ergodic problem ergodic theory Khinchin statistical mechanics|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Robert W. Batterman (1998). Why Equilibrium Statistical Mechanics Works: Universality and the Renormalization Group. Philosophy of Science 65 (2):183-208.
Janneke van Lith (2001). Ergodic Theory, Interpretations of Probability and the Foundations of Statistical Mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 32 (4):581--94.
Janneke van Lith (2001). Ergodic Theory, Interpretations of Probability and the Foundations of Statistical Mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 32 (4):581-594.
John Earman & Miklós Rédei (1996). Why Ergodic Theory Does Not Explain the Success of Equilibrium Statistical Mechanics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 47 (1):63-78.
David B. Malament & Sandy L. Zabell (1980). Why Gibbs Phase Averages Work--The Role of Ergodic Theory. Philosophy of Science 47 (3):339-349.
Roman Frigg & Joseph Berkovitz (2011). The Ergodic Hierarchy. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Karl Petersen (1996). Ergodic Theorems and the Basis of Science. Synthese 108 (2):171 - 183.
S. J. Paul M. Quay (1978). A Philosophical Explanation of the Explanatory Functions of Ergodic Theory. Philosophy of Science 45 (1):47-59.
Massimiliano Badino (2006). The Foundational Role of Ergodic Theory. Foundations of Science 11 (4):323-347.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads4 ( #267,670 of 1,101,875 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #306,556 of 1,101,875 )
How can I increase my downloads?