Foundations of Science

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 323–347 | Cite as

The Foundational Role of Ergodic Theory

Article

Abstract

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 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Badino, M. (2005). I due problemi fondamentali della meccanica statistica, La Goliardica, Pavia, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  2. Batterman, R.W. 1998Why Equilibrium Statistical Mechanics Works: Universality and the Renormalization GroupPhilosophy of Science65183208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brush, S.G. eds. 1986The Kind of Motion We Call HeatAmsterdamNorth HollandGoogle Scholar
  4. Friedman, K. 1976A Partial Vindication of Ergodic TheoryPhilosophy of Science43151162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gallavotti. G. (1982). Aspetti della teoria ergodica qualitativa e statistica del moto. Pitagora, Bologna.Google Scholar
  6. Gallavotti, G. 1999Statistical MechanicsSpringer–VerlagNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Guttmann, Y.M. 1999The Concept of Probability in Statistical PhysicsCambridge University PressCambridgeGoogle Scholar
  8. Haar, A. 1933Der Massbegriff in der Theorie der Kontinuierlichen GruppenAnnals of Mathematics34147169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jancel, R. 1963Foundations of Classical and Quantum Statistical MechanicsPergamonLondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Khinchin, A.I. 1949Mathematical Foundations of Statistical MechanicsDoverNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Malament, D., Zabell, S. 1980Why Gibbs Phase Average Work – The Role of Ergodic TheoryPhilosophy of Science47339349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Mathieu, M. 1988On the origin of the notion of Ergodic theoryExpositiones Mathematicae6373377Google Scholar
  13. Oxtoby, J.C. 1980Measure and CategorySpringerNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Von Plato, J. 1982The Significance of the Ergodic Decomposition of Stationary Measures for the Interpretation of ProbabilitySynthese53419432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Von Plato, J. (1987). Probabilistic Physics: The Classical Way. In L. J. Daston, M. Heildeberg, L. Krüger (eds.), The Probabilistic Revolution. Cambridge: MIT Press, 379–407.Google Scholar
  16. Von Plato, J. 1992Boltzmann’s Ergodic HypothesisArchive for the History of exact Sciences447189Google Scholar
  17. Von Plato, J. 1994Creating Modern ProbabilityCambridge University PressCambridgeGoogle Scholar
  18. Sklar, L. 1993Physics and ChanceCambridge University PressCambridgeGoogle Scholar
  19. Quay, P. 1978A Philosophical Explanation of the Explanatory Function of Ergodic TheoryPhilosophy of Science454759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Truesdell, C. (1961). Ergodic Theory in Classical Statistical Mechanics. Rendiconti della Scuola Internazionale di Fisica ‘Enrico Fermi’, XIV, New York: Academic Press, 21–56.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of GenoaGenoaItaly
  2. 2.Max-Planch-Institut für WissenschaftsgeschichteBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations