Founded on classical mechanics and interpretation of classical staistical mechanical probabilities

The problem of relation between statistical mechanics (SM) and classical mechanics (CM), especially the question whether SM can be founded on CM, has been a subject of controversies since the rise of classical statistical mechanics (CSM) at the end of 19th century. The first views rejecting explicitly the possibility of laying the foundations of CSM in CM were triggered by the "Wiederkehr-" and "Umkehreinwand" arguments. These arguments played an important role in the debate about Boltzmann's original H-theorem and led to the so called statistical H-theorem proposed by Boltzmann himself. (For the history of these early debates we refer to Brush's monograph (Brush 1976).) After CSM had been brought to "canonical form" by the Ehrenfests, (Ehrenfest and Ehrenfest 1959) the physicists turned away from the foundational problem leaving it to mathematicians to worry about in the form of what has become called the ergodic theory. In retrospect, the physicists' general mood seems to have been the hope that ergodic theory establishes rigorously what is needed to found CSM on CM and which had been expressed essentially by Boltzmann already (Wightman 1985). However, very few physicists followed closely the developments in the mathematical theory of dynamic systems. One of those who did was the Russian physicist N.S. Krylov. (For a brief description of Krylov's personal life we refer to the papers in (Krylov 1979).).
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Download options
Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 28,233
External links

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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Foundations of Statistical Mechanics—Two Approaches.Stephen Leeds - 2003 - Philosophy of Science 70 (1):126-144.
The Emergence and Interpretation of Probability in Bohmian Mechanics.Craig Callender - 2007 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 38 (2):351-370.
Probability and Determinism.Jan Von Plato - 1982 - Philosophy of Science 49 (1):51-66.
Probability in Deterministic Physics.J. T. Ismael - 2009 - Journal of Philosophy 106 (2):89-108.
The Classical Limit of Quantum Theory.John T. Bruer - 1982 - Synthese 50 (2):167 - 212.
Random Dynamics and the Research Programme of Classical Mechanics.Michal Tempczyk - 1991 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 5 (3):227 – 239.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

49 ( #107,143 of 2,172,903 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #324,815 of 2,172,903 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums