Mechanistic slumber vs. statistical insomnia: The early history of Boltzmann's H-theorem (1868-1877)

12Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

An intricate, long, and occasionally heated debate surrounds Boltzmann's H-theorem (1872) and his combinatorial interpretation of the second law (1877). After almost a century of devoted and knowledgeable scholarship, there is still no agreement as to whether Boltzmann changed his view of the second law after Loschmidt's 1876 reversibility argument or whether he had already been holding a probabilistic conception for some years at that point. In this paper, I argue that there was no abrupt statistical turn. In the first part, I discuss the development of Boltzmann's research from 1868 to the formulation of the H-theorem. This reconstruction shows that Boltzmann adopted a pluralistic strategy based on the interplay between a kinetic and a combinatorial approach. Moreover, it shows that the extensive use of asymptotic conditions allowed Boltzmann to bracket the problem of exceptions. In the second part I suggest that both Loschmidt's challenge and Boltzmann's response to it did not concern the H-theorem. The close relation between the theorem and the reversibility argument is a consequence of later investigations on the subject. © EDP Sciences, Springer-Verlag 2011.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Badino, M. (2011). Mechanistic slumber vs. statistical insomnia: The early history of Boltzmann’s H-theorem (1868-1877). European Physical Journal H. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjh/e2011-10048-5

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free