Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-bvgqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T23:54:32.785Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Epsilon-Ergodicity and the Success of Equilibrium Statistical Mechanics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Peter B. M. Vranas
Peter B. M. Vranas*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Michigan
*
†Send requests for reprints to the author, Department of Philosophy, The University of Michigan, 2215 Angeli Hall, Ann Arbor MI 48109, USA; e-mail: vranas@umich.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Why does classical equilibrium statistical mechanics work? Malament and Zabell (1980) noticed that, for ergodic dynamical systems, the unique absolutely continuous invariant probability measure is the microcanonical. Earman and Rédei (1996) replied that systems of interest are very probably not ergodic, so that absolutely continuous invariant probability measures very distant from the microcanonical exist. In response I define the generalized properties of epsilon-ergodicity and epsilon-continuity, I review computational evidence indicating that systems of interest are epsilon-ergodic, I adapt Malament and Zabell's defense of absolute continuity to support epsilon-continuity, and I prove that, for epsilon-ergodic systems, every epsilon-continuous invariant probability measure is very close to the microcanonical.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 65 , Issue 4 , December 1998 , pp. 688 - 708
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

‡

I am very grateful to Robert Batterman, James Joyce, and Lawrence Sklar for extensive discussion. Thanks also to Stephen Leeds, David Malament, and Peter Railton for help. Versions of this paper were presented at the seventy-second annual meeting of the Pacific Division of the American Philosophical Association (Los Angeles, March 1998) and at the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy (Boston, August 1998).

References

Ackland, Graeme J. (1993), “Equipartition and ergodicity in closed one-dimensional systems of hard spheres with different masses”, Physical Review E 47: 3268–3275.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Batterman, Robert W. (1998), “Why equilibrium statistical mechanics works: Universality and the renormalization group”, Philosophy of Science 65: 183–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, C. and Roepstorff, G. (1987), “Effects of phase space discretization on the long-time behavior of dynamical systems”, Physica D 25: 173–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benettin, Giancarlo (1994), “Ergodicity and time-scales for statistical equilibrium in classical dynamical systems”, Progress of Theoretical Physics Supplement 116: 207–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benettin, Giancarlo, Casartelli, M., Galgani, Luigi, Giorgilli, Antonio, and Strelcyn, Jean-Marie (1978), “On the reliability of numerical studies of stochasticity. I: Existence of time averages”, Nuovo Cimento B 44: 183–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benettin, Giancarlo, Casartelli, M., Galgani, Luigi, Giorgilli, Antonio, and Strelcyn, Jean-Marie (1979), “On the reliability of numerical studies of stochasticity. II: Identification of time averages”, Nuovo Cimento B 50: 211–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benettin, Giancarlo, Froeschlé, C., and Scheidecker, J. P. (1979), “Kolmogorov entropy of a dynamical system with an increasing number of degrees of freedom”, Physical Review A 19: 2454–2460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benettin, Giancarlo, Galgani, Luigi, and Strelcyn, Jean-Marie (1976), “Kolmogorov entropy and numerical experiments”, Physical Review A 14: 2338–2345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benettin, Giancarlo, Vecchio, Guido Lo, and Tenenbaum, Alexander (1980), “Stochastic transition in two-dimensional Lennard-Jones systems”, Physical Review A 22: 1709–1719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berdichevsky, V. L. and Alberti, M. V. (1991), “Statistical mechanics of Hénon-Heiles oscillators”, Physical Review A 44: 858–865.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bocchieri, P., Scotti, A., Bearzi, B., and Loinger, A. (1970), “Anharmonic chain with Lennard-Jones interaction”, Physical Review A 2: 2013–2019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyarsky, Abraham (1984), “On the significance of absolutely continuous invariant measures”, Physica D 11: 130–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyarsky, Abraham (1990), “Discontinuity of physical measures”, Physics Letters A 149: 12–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bunimovich, Leonid, Liverani, Carlangelo, Pellegrinotti, Alessandro, and Suhov, Yurii (1992), “Ergodic systems of n balls in a billiard table”, Communications in Mathematical Physics 146: 357–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cercignani, C., Galgani, Luigi, and Scotti, A. (1972), “Zero-point energy in classical nonlinear mechanics”, Physics Letters A 38: 403–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corless, R. M. (1994), “What good are numerical simulations of chaotic dynamical systems?” Computers and Mathematics with Applications 28: 107–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornfeld, I. P., Fomin, Sergei V., and Sinai, Yakov G. (1982), Ergodic theory. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Luca, J., Lichtenberg, Allan J., and Lieberman, Michael A. (1995), “Time scale to ergodicity in the Fermi-Pasta-Ulam system”, Chaos 5: 283–297.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Luca, J., Lichtenberg, Allan J., and Ruffo, Stefano (1995), “Energy transitions and time scales to equipartition in the Fermi-Pasta-Ulam oscillator chain”, Physical Review E 51:2877–2885.Google Scholar
Diana, E., Galgani, Luigi, Casartelli, M., Casati, G., and Scotti, A. (1976), “Stochastic transition in a classical nonlinear dynamical system: A Lennard-Jones chain”, Theoretical and Mathematical Physics 29: 1022–1027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Earman, John and Rédei, Miklós (1996), “Why ergodic theory does not explain the success of equilibrium statistical mechanics”, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 47: 63–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falcioni, M., Marini Bettolo Marconi, U., and Vulpiani, Angelo (1991), “Ergodic properties of high-dimensional symplectic maps”, Physical Review A 44: 2263–2270.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farquhar, I. E. (1964), Ergodic theory in statistical mechanics. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Fermi, Enrico, Pasta, John, and Ulam, S. (1965), “Studies of non linear problems”, in Segré, E. (ed.), Enrico Fermi: Collected papers, vol. II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 978–988. [Original circulated 1955 as Document LA-1940.]Google Scholar
Ford, Joseph (1992), “The Fermi-Pasta-Ulam problem: Paradox turns discovery”, Physics Reports 213: 271–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, K. S. (1976), “A partial vindication of ergodic theory”, Philosophy of Science 43: 151–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Froeschlé, C. (1978), “Connectance of dynamical systems with increasing number of degrees of freedom”, Physical Review A 18: 277–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Froeschlé, C. and Scheidecker, J. P. (1975), “Stochasticity of dynamical systems with increasing number of degrees of freedom”, Physical Review A 12: 2137–2143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galgani, Luigi, Giorgilli, Antonio, Martinoli, Andrea, and Vanzini, Stefano (1992), “On the problem of energy equipartition for large systems of the Fermi-Pasta-Ulam type: Analytical and numerical estimates”, Physica D 59: 334–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galgani, Luigi and Vecchio, Guido Lo (1979), “Stochasticity thresholds for systems of coupled oscillators”, Nuovo Cimento B 52: 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, J. Willard (1902), Elementary principles in statistical mechanics. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.Google Scholar
Góra, P. and Boyarsky, Abraham (1988), “Why computers like Lebesgue measure”, Computers and Mathematics with Applications 16: 321–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Györgyi, G., Ling, F. H., and Schmidt, G. (1989), “Torus structure in higher-dimensional Hamiltonian systems”, Physical Review A 40: 5311–5318.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hénon, Michel (1983), “Numerical exploration of Hamiltonian systems”, in Iooss, G., Helleman, R. H. G., and Stora, R. (eds.), Chaotic behaviour of deterministic systems. New York: North-Holland, pp. 53–170.Google Scholar
Hurd, Lyman, Grebogi, Celso, and Ott, Edward (1994), “On the tendency toward ergodicity with increasing number of degrees of freedom in Hamiltonian systems”, in Seimenis, J. (ed.), Hamiltonian mechanics: Integrability and chaotic behavior. New York: Plenum, pp. 123–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kantz, Holger (1989), “Vanishing stability thresholds in the thermodynamic limit of non-integrable conservative systems”, Physica D 39: 322–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kantz, Holger, Livi, Roberto, and Ruffo, Stefano (1994), “Equipartition thresholds in chains of anharmonic oscillators”, Journal of Statistical Physics 76: 627–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kazumasa, Shinjo and Tomohei, Sasada (1996), “Hamiltonian systems with many degrees of freedom: Asymmetric motion and intensity of motion in phase space”, Physical Review E 54: 4685–4700.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Khinchin, Aleksandr I. (1949), Mathematical foundations of statistical mechanics, trans. G. Gamow. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Krámli, A., Simányi, Nándor, and Szász, Domokos (1991), “The K-property of three billiard balls”, Annals of Mathematics 133: 37–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krámli, A., Simányi, Nándor, and Szász, Domokos (1992), “The K-property of four billiard balls”, Communications in Mathematical Physics 144: 107–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lanford, Oscar E., III, (1973), “Entropy and equilibrium states in classical statistical mechanics”, in Lenard, A. (ed.), Statistical mechanics and mathematical problems. New York: Springer, pp. 1–113.Google Scholar
Lanford, Oscar E., III, (1983), “Introduction to the mathematical theory of dynamical systems”, in Iooss, G., Helleman, R. H. G., and Stora, R. (eds.), Chaotic behaviour of deterministic systems. New York: North-Holland, pp. 3–51.Google Scholar
Leeds, Stephen (1989), “Malament and Zabell on Gibbs phase averaging”, Philosophy of Science 56: 325–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lichtenberg, Allan J. and Lieberman, Michael A. (1992), Regular and chaotic dynamics (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Livi, Roberto, Pettini, Marco, Ruffo, Stefano, Sparpaglione, Massimo, and Vulpiani, Angelo (1985a), “Equipartition threshold in nonlinear large Hamiltonian systems: The Fermi-Pasta-Ulam model”, Physical Review A 31: 1039–1045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Livi, Roberto, Pettini, Marco, Ruffo, Stefano, and Vulpiani, Angelo (1985b), “Further results on the equipartition threshold in large nonlinear Hamiltonian systems”, Physical Review A 31: 2740–2742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Livi, Roberto, Pettini, Marco, Ruffo, Stefano, and Vulpiani, Angelo (1987), “Chaotic behavior in nonlinear Hamiltonian systems and equilibrium statistical mechanics”, Journal of Statistical Physics 48: 539–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malament, David B. and Zabell, Sandy L. (1980), “Why Gibbs phase averages work—The role of ergodic theory”, Philosophy of Science 47: 339–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markus, L. and Meyer, K. R. (1974), “Generic Hamiltonian dynamical systems are neither integrable nor ergodic”, Memoirs of the American Mathematical Society 144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazur, P. and van der Linden, J. (1963), “Asymptotic form of the structure function for real systems”, Journal of Mathematical Physics 4: 271–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palmore, Julian I. and McCauley, Joseph L. (1987), “Shadowing by computable chaotic orbits”, Physics Letters A 122: 399–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pettini, Marco and Cerruti-Sola, Monica (1991), “Strong stochasticity threshold in nonlinear large Hamiltonian systems: Effect on mixing times”, Physical Review A 44: 975–987.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pettini, Marco and Landolfi, Marco (1990), “Relaxation properties and ergodicity breaking in nonlinear Hamiltonian dynamics”, Physical Review A 41: 768–783.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Quay, Paul M. (1978), “A philosophical explanation of the explanatory functions of ergodic theory”, Philosophy of Science 45: 47–59.Google Scholar
Reichl, L. E. (1998), A modern course in statistical physics (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Reidl, Charles J., Jr, . and Miller, Bruce N. (1992), “Gravity in one dimension: Stability of periodic orbits”, Physical Review A 46: 837–843.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reidl, Charles J., Jr, . and Miller, Bruce N. (1993), “Gravity in one dimension: The critical population”, Physical Review A 48: 4250–4256.Google ScholarPubMed
Rudin, Walter (1976), Principles of mathematical analysis (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Simányi, Nándor (1992a), “The K-property of N billiard balls I”, Inventiones Mathematicae 108: 521–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simányi, Nándor (1992b), “The K-property of N billiard balls II. Computation of neutral linear spaces”, Inventiones Mathematicae 110: 151–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simányi, Nándor and Szász, Domokos (1994), “The K-property of 4D billiards with non-orthogonal cylindric scatterers”, Journal of Statistical Physics 76: 587–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinai, Yakov G. (1970), “Dynamical systems with elastic reflections”, Russian Mathematical Surveys 25: 137–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinai, Yakov G. and Chernov, N. I. (1987), “Ergodic properties of certain systems of two-dimensional disks and three-dimensional balls”, Russian Mathematical Surveys 42: 181–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sklar, Lawrence (1973), “Statistical explanation and ergodic theory”, Philosophy of Science 40: 194–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sklar, Lawrence (1978), “Comments”, in P. D. Asquith and I. Hacking (eds.), PSA 1978, vol. 2. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 186–193.Google Scholar
Sklar, Lawrence (1993), Physics and chance: Philosophical issues in the foundations of statistical mechanics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoddard, Spotswood D. and Ford, Joseph (1973), “Numerical experiments on the stochastic behavior of a Lennard-Jones gas system”, Physical Review A 8: 1504–1512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szász, Domokos (1996), “Boltzmann's ergodic hypothesis, a conjecture for centuries?” Studia Scientiarum Mathematicarum Hungarica 31: 299–322.Google Scholar
Wightman, A. S. (1985), “Regular and chaotic motions in dynamical systems: Introduction to the problems”, in Velo, G. and Wightman, A. S. (eds.), Regular and chaotic motion in dynamical systems. New York: Plenum, pp. 1–26.Google Scholar
Wright, H. L. and Miller, Bruce N. (1984), “Gravity in one dimension: A dynamical and statistical study”, Physical Review A 29: 1411–1418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zheng, Zhigang, Hu, Gang, and Zhang, Juyuan (1996), “Ergodicity in hard-ball systems and Boltzmann's entropy”, Physical Review E 53: 3246–3252.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed