Boltzmann’s Time Bomb

British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 53 (1):83-119 (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Since the late nineteenth century, physics has been puzzled by the time-asymmetry of thermodynamic phenomena in the light of the apparent T-symmetry of the underlying laws of mechanics. However, a compelling solution to this puzzle has proved elusive. In part, I argue, this can be attributed to a failure to distinguish two conceptions of the problem. According to one, the main focus of our attention is a time-asymmetric lawlike generalisation. According to the other, it is a particular fact about the early universe. This paper aims (i) to distinguish these two different conceptions of the time-asymmetric explanandum in thermodynamics; (ii) to argue in favour of the latter; and (iii) to show that whichever we choose, our rational expectations about the thermodynamic behaviour of the future must depend on what we know about the past: contrary to the common view, statistical arguments alone do not give us good reason to expect that entropy will always continue to increase.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 96,594

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

What is the Problem about the Time‐Asymmetry of Thermodynamics?—A Reply to Price.Jill North - 2002 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 53 (1):121-136.
Thermodynamic asymmetry in time.Craig Callender - 2006 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Fundamentality and Time’s Arrow.Christian Loew - 2018 - Philosophy of Science 85 (3):483-500.
Time in Thermodynamics.Jill North - 2011 - In Craig Callender (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Time. Oxford University Press. pp. 312--350.
What can we learn about physical laws from the fact that we have memories only of the past?John D. Norton - 2000 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 14 (1):11 – 23.
The Open Universe: Totality, Self-reference and Time.Jenann Ismael - forthcoming - Australasian Philosophical Review.
Time’s Arrow Today. [REVIEW]Katinka Ridderbos - 1997 - Philosophical Review 106 (4):627-629.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
348 (#68,862)

6 months
55 (#102,983)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Huw Price
Cambridge University (PhD)

Citations of this work

Calling for Explanation.Dan Baras - 2022 - New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Perceiving Direction in Directionless Time.Matt Farr - 2023 - In Kasia M. Jaszczolt (ed.), Understanding Human Time. Oxford University Press. pp. 199-219.
The “Past Hypothesis”: Not even false.John Earman - 2006 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 37 (3):399-430.
Calling for explanation: the case of the thermodynamic past state.Dan Baras & Orly Shenker - 2020 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 10 (3):1-20.

View all 31 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

The emperor’s new mind.Roger Penrose - 1989 - Oxford University Press.
Time’s arrow and Archimedes’ point.Huw Price - 1996 - Philosophical and Phenomenological Research 59 (4):1093-1096.

View all 19 references / Add more references