Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition (IMECE)

Entropy: Part II — Thermodynamics and Perfect Order

Elias P. Gyftopoulos

Published Nov 14, 1999• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Abstract Part II of this two-part paper refutes the beliefs about the statistical interpretation of thermodynamics, and the association of entropy with disorder that are summarized in Part I. The refutation of the statistical approach is based on either a nonstatistical unified quantum theory of mechanics and thermodynamics, or an almost equivalent, novel, nonquantal exposition of thermodynamics. Entropy is shown to be: (i) valid for any system (both macroscopic and microscopic, including one-particle systems), and any state (both thermodynamic or stable equilibrium, and not stable equilibrium); (ii) a measure of the quantum-theoretic pliable shape of the molecules of a system; and (iii) a monotonic indicator of order. In contrast to statistics which associates a thermodynamic equilibrium macrostate with the largest number of compatible microstates, the second law avers that, for each set of values of energy, volume, and amounts of constituents of either a macroscopic or a microscopic system, there exists one and only one thermodynamic or stable equilibrium state. So, even if Boltzmann’s definition were used, a thermodynamic equilibrium state is one of perfect order.

DOI
10.1115/imece1999-0831

Related papers

Entropies of Statistical Mechanics and Disorder Versus the Entropy of Thermodynamics and Order

Elias P. Gyftopoulos

The prevailing beliefs in the scientific and engineering literature are that: (i) thermodynamics is explained and justified by statistical mechanics; (ii) entropy is a statistical measure of disorder; and (iii) for given values of energy, volume, and amounts of constituents, the largest value of entropy corresponds to both a thermodynamic equilibrium state and the ultimate disorder. In this paper, we provide: (i) a summary of the beliefs as stated by some eminent scientists; (ii) experimental evidence that casts serious doubt about the validity of the beliefs; (iii) an outline of a nonstatistical unified quantum theory of mechanics and thermodynamics; (iv) an outline of a nonquantal, nonstatistical exposition of thermodynamics, valid for all systems (both macroscopic and microscopic), and for all states (both thermodynamic equilibrium and not thermodynamic equilibrium); (v) the definition and analytical expression of the entropy of thermodynamics; (vi) the interpretation of entropy as both a measure of the quantum-theoretic spatial shape of a molecule, and an indicator of order; and (vii) nonstatistical answers to the questions that motivated the introduction of statistical mechanics.

Journal of Energy Resources Technology•Dec 13, 2000•12 citations

Building on the Legacy of Professor Keenan. Entropy An Intrinsic Property of Matter

Elias P. Gyftopoulos, Gian Paolo Beretta, Ahmed F. Ghoniem +1 more

In the scientific and engineering literature, entropy—the distinguishing feature of thermodynamics from other branches of physics—is viewed with skepticism, and thought to be not a physical property of matter—like mass or energy—but a measure either of disorder in a system, or of lack of information about the physics of a system in a thermodynamic equilibrium state, and a plethora of expressions are proposed for its analytical representation. In this article, I present briefly two revolutionary nonstatistical expositions of thermodynamics (revolutionary in the sense of Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, U. Chicago Press, 1970) that apply to all systems (both macroscopic and microscopic, including one spin or a single particle), to all states (thermodynamic equilibrium, and not thermodynamic equilibrium), and that disclose entropy as an intrinsic property of matter.The first theory is presented without reference to quantum mechanics even though quantum theoretic ideas are lurking behind the exposition. The second theory is a unified quantum theory of mechanics and thermodynamics without statistical probabilities, that is, I am not presenting another version of statistical quantum mechanics.

AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2008•0 citations

Gibbs and Boltzmann Entropy in Classical and Quantum Mechanics

Sheldon Goldstein, Joel L. Lebowitz, Roderich Tumulka +1 more

The Gibbs entropy of a macroscopic classical system is a function of a probability distribution over phase space, i.e., of an ensemble. In contrast, the Boltzmann entropy is a function on phase space, and is thus defined for an individual system. Our aim is to discuss and compare these two notions of entropy, along with the associated ensemblist and individualist views of thermal equilibrium. Using the Gibbsian ensembles for the computation of the Gibbs entropy, the two notions yield the same (leading order) values for the entropy of a macroscopic system in thermal equilibrium. The two approaches do not, however, necessarily agree for non-equilibrium systems. For those, we argue that the Boltzmann entropy is the one that corresponds to thermodynamic entropy, in particular, in connection with the second law of thermodynamics. Moreover, we describe the quantum analog of the Boltzmann entropy, and we argue that the individualist (Boltzmannian) concept of equilibrium is supported by the recent works on thermalization of closed quantum systems.

WORLD SCIENTIFIC eBooks•Apr 21, 2020•62 citations

Gibbs and boltzmann entropy in classical and quantum mechanics

Sheldon Goldstein, Joel L. Lebowitz, Roderich Tumulka +1 more

The Gibbs entropy of a macroscopic classical system is a function of a probability distribution over phase space, i.e., of an ensemble. In contrast, the Boltzmann entropy is a function on phase space, and is thus defined for an individual system. Our aim is to discuss and compare these two notions of entropy, along with the associated ensemblist and individualist views of thermal equilibrium. Using the Gibbsian ensembles for the computation of the Gibbs entropy, the two notions yield the same (leading order) values for the entropy of a macroscopic system in thermal equilibrium. The two approaches do not, however, necessarily agree for non-equilibrium systems. For those, we argue that the Boltzmann entropy is the one that corresponds to thermodynamic entropy, in particular in connection with the second law of thermodynamics. Moreover, we describe the quantum analog of the Boltzmann entropy, and we argue that the individualist (Boltzmannian) concept of equilibrium is supported by the recent works on thermalization of closed quantum systems.

arXiv:1903.11870•Mar 28, 2019•17 citations

Fluctuations, Thermodynamic Equilibrium and Entropy

Edwin C. Kemble

To eliminate exceptions to the second law due to fluctuation phenomena, etc., the following changes are necessary. First we must state the laws of thermodynamics in terms of Gibbsian ensembles rather than of individual systems. Second we must sharpen our conception of the experimental procedure required for producing states of thermodynamic equilibrium. It will not suffice to isolate the system and wait. We must have the positive stirring action of thermal contact with a thermostat. Using the new definition of thermal equilibrium we can place statistical mechanics on a more satisfactory footing by showing that the thermostat experimental procedure leads to the canonical ensemble and maximizes v. Neumann's microscopic entropy. (Details of this proof appear in succeeding paper). Difficulties with his macroscopic definition of entropy are avoided by showing that his original microscopic definition is satisfactory when used in conjunction with a proper operational definition of thermodynamic equilibrium. In conclusion the second law of thermodynamics is derived from quantum statistics on the basis of the microscopic definition of entropy.

Physical Review•Nov 15, 1939•18 citations

Probabilistic Foundations of Statistical Mechanics: A Bayesian Approach

Brian H Buck, A. C. Merchant

We examine the fundamental aspects of statistical mechanics, dividing the problem into a discussion purely about probability, which we analyse from a Bayesian standpoint. We argue that the existence of a unique maximising probability distribution $\{p(j\vert K)\}$ for states labelled by $j$ given data $K$ implies that the corresponding maximal value of the information entropy $σ(\{(p_j\vert K)\}) = -\sum_j (p_j \vert K)\ln{(p_j\vert K)}$ depends explicitly on the data at equilibrium and on the Hamiltonian of the system. As such, it is a direct measure of our uncertainty about the exact state of the body and can be identified with the traditional thermodynamic entropy. We consider the well known microcanonical, canonical and grand canonical methods and ensure that the fluctuations about mean values are generally minuscule for macroscopic systems before identifying these mean values with experimental observables and thereby connecting to many standard results from thermodynamics. Unexpectedly, we find that it is not generally possible for a quantum process to be both isentropic and reversibly adiabatic. This is in sharp contrast to traditional thermodynamics where it is assumed that isentropic, reversible adiabatic processes can be summoned up on demand and easily realised. By contrast, we find that linear relations between pressures $P_j$ and energies $E_j$ are necessary and sufficient conditions for a quasi-static and adiabatic change to be isentropic, but, of course, this relationship only holds for a few especially simple systems, such as the perfect gas, and is not generally true for more complicated systems. By considering the associated entropy increases up to second order in small volume changes we argue that the consequences are in practice negligible.

arXiv:1512.01368•Dec 4, 2015•1 citation
Abstract Part II of this two-part paper refutes the beliefs about the statistical interpretation of thermodynamics, and the association of entropy with disorder that are summarized in Part I. The refutation of the statistical approach is based on either a nonstatistical unified quantum theory of mechanics and thermodynamics, or an almost equivalent, novel, nonquantal exposition of thermodynamics. Entropy is shown to be: (i) valid for any system (both macroscopic and microscopic, including one-particle systems), and any state (both thermodynamic or stable equilibrium, and not stable equilibrium); (ii) a measure of the quantum-theoretic pliable shape of the molecules of a system; and (iii) a monotonic indicator of order. In contrast to statistics which associates a thermodynamic equilibrium macrostate with the largest number of compatible microstates, the second law avers that, for each set of values of energy, volume, and amounts of constituents of either a macroscopic or a microscopic system, there exists one and only one thermodynamic or stable equilibrium state. So, even if Boltzmann’s definition were used, a thermodynamic equilibrium state is one of perfect order.
The prevailing beliefs in the scientific and engineering literature are that: (i) thermodynamics is explained and justified by statistical mechanics; (ii) entropy is a statistical measure of disorder; and (iii) for given values of energy, volume, and amounts of constituents, the largest value of entropy corresponds to both a thermodynamic equilibrium state and the ultimate disorder. In this paper, we provide: (i) a summary of the beliefs as stated by some eminent scientists; (ii) experimental evidence that casts serious doubt about the validity of the beliefs; (iii) an outline of a nonstatistical unified quantum theory of mechanics and thermodynamics; (iv) an outline of a nonquantal, nonstatistical exposition of thermodynamics, valid for all systems (both macroscopic and microscopic), and for all states (both thermodynamic equilibrium and not thermodynamic equilibrium); (v) the definition and analytical expression of the entropy of thermodynamics; (vi) the interpretation of entropy as both a measure of the quantum-theoretic spatial shape of a molecule, and an indicator of order; and (vii) nonstatistical answers to the questions that motivated the introduction of statistical mechanics.
In the scientific and engineering literature, entropy—the distinguishing feature of thermodynamics from other branches of physics—is viewed with skepticism, and thought to be not a physical property of matter—like mass or energy—but a measure either of disorder in a system, or of lack of information about the physics of a system in a thermodynamic equilibrium state, and a plethora of expressions are proposed for its analytical representation. In this article, I present briefly two revolutionary nonstatistical expositions of thermodynamics (revolutionary in the sense of Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, U. Chicago Press, 1970) that apply to all systems (both macroscopic and microscopic, including one spin or a single particle), to all states (thermodynamic equilibrium, and not thermodynamic equilibrium), and that disclose entropy as an intrinsic property of matter.The first theory is presented without reference to quantum mechanics even though quantum theoretic ideas are lurking behind the exposition. The second theory is a unified quantum theory of mechanics and thermodynamics without statistical probabilities, that is, I am not presenting another version of statistical quantum mechanics.
The Gibbs entropy of a macroscopic classical system is a function of a probability distribution over phase space, i.e., of an ensemble. In contrast, the Boltzmann entropy is a function on phase space, and is thus defined for an individual system. Our aim is to discuss and compare these two notions of entropy, along with the associated ensemblist and individualist views of thermal equilibrium. Using the Gibbsian ensembles for the computation of the Gibbs entropy, the two notions yield the same (leading order) values for the entropy of a macroscopic system in thermal equilibrium. The two approaches do not, however, necessarily agree for non-equilibrium systems. For those, we argue that the Boltzmann entropy is the one that corresponds to thermodynamic entropy, in particular, in connection with the second law of thermodynamics. Moreover, we describe the quantum analog of the Boltzmann entropy, and we argue that the individualist (Boltzmannian) concept of equilibrium is supported by the recent works on thermalization of closed quantum systems.
The Gibbs entropy of a macroscopic classical system is a function of a probability distribution over phase space, i.e., of an ensemble. In contrast, the Boltzmann entropy is a function on phase space, and is thus defined for an individual system. Our aim is to discuss and compare these two notions of entropy, along with the associated ensemblist and individualist views of thermal equilibrium. Using the Gibbsian ensembles for the computation of the Gibbs entropy, the two notions yield the same (leading order) values for the entropy of a macroscopic system in thermal equilibrium. The two approaches do not, however, necessarily agree for non-equilibrium systems. For those, we argue that the Boltzmann entropy is the one that corresponds to thermodynamic entropy, in particular in connection with the second law of thermodynamics. Moreover, we describe the quantum analog of the Boltzmann entropy, and we argue that the individualist (Boltzmannian) concept of equilibrium is supported by the recent works on thermalization of closed quantum systems.
To eliminate exceptions to the second law due to fluctuation phenomena, etc., the following changes are necessary. First we must state the laws of thermodynamics in terms of Gibbsian ensembles rather than of individual systems. Second we must sharpen our conception of the experimental procedure required for producing states of thermodynamic equilibrium. It will not suffice to isolate the system and wait. We must have the positive stirring action of thermal contact with a thermostat. Using the new definition of thermal equilibrium we can place statistical mechanics on a more satisfactory footing by showing that the thermostat experimental procedure leads to the canonical ensemble and maximizes v. Neumann's microscopic entropy. (Details of this proof appear in succeeding paper). Difficulties with his macroscopic definition of entropy are avoided by showing that his original microscopic definition is satisfactory when used in conjunction with a proper operational definition of thermodynamic equilibrium. In conclusion the second law of thermodynamics is derived from quantum statistics on the basis of the microscopic definition of entropy.
We examine the fundamental aspects of statistical mechanics, dividing the problem into a discussion purely about probability, which we analyse from a Bayesian standpoint. We argue that the existence of a unique maximising probability distribution {p(j∣K)}\{p(j\vert K)\}{p(j∣K)} for states labelled by jjj given data KKK implies that the corresponding maximal value of the information entropy σ({(pj∣K)})=−∑j(pj∣K)ln⁡(pj∣K)σ(\{(p_j\vert K)\}) = -\sum_j (p_j \vert K)\ln{(p_j\vert K)}σ({(pj​∣K)})=−∑j​(pj​∣K)ln(pj​∣K) depends explicitly on the data at equilibrium and on the Hamiltonian of the system. As such, it is a direct measure of our uncertainty about the exact state of the body and can be identified with the traditional thermodynamic entropy. We consider the well known microcanonical, canonical and grand canonical methods and ensure that the fluctuations about mean values are generally minuscule for macroscopic systems before identifying these mean values with experimental observables and thereby connecting to many standard results from thermodynamics. Unexpectedly, we find that it is not generally possible for a quantum process to be both isentropic and reversibly adiabatic. This is in sharp contrast to traditional thermodynamics where it is assumed that isentropic, reversible adiabatic processes can be summoned up on demand and easily realised. By contrast, we find that linear relations between pressures PjP_jPj​ and energies EjE_jEj​ are necessary and sufficient conditions for a quasi-static and adiabatic change to be isentropic, but, of course, this relationship only holds for a few especially simple systems, such as the perfect gas, and is not generally true for more complicated systems. By considering the associated entropy increases up to second order in small volume changes we argue that the consequences are in practice negligible.