Oxford University Press eBooks

Probabilities in Statistical Mechanics

Wayne C. Myrvold

Published Feb 11, 2021• 2 citations

Abstract

This chapter deals with the question of how we should think of the probabilities introduced in statistical mechanics. It is usually said that these probabilities are introduced on the basis of our ignorance of the precise state of the system, or our incapacity to treat analytically the equations of motion in order to deliver a detailed account of the evolution of the system, or both. This suggests an epistemic reading. However, we make predictions on the basis of them, that are verified by experiment. This suggests that they be thought of as objective chances. It looks as if we have to employ both the epistemic and the objective concept, in an inconsistent way. Moreover, the standard equilibrium probabilities, applied to a system that has relaxed to equilibrium while isolated from its environment, cannot be either credences or chances. It is argued that the hybrid concept, epistemic chance, resolves these puzzles and is suited to play the role required of probability in statistical mechanics.

DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198865094.003.0008

Related papers

Probabilities in Statistical Mechanics: What are they?

Wayne C. Myrvold

This paper addresses the question of how we should regard the probability distributions introduced into statistical mechanics. It will be argued that it is problematic to take them either as purely ontic, or purely epistemic. I will propose a third alternative: they are almost objective probabilities, or epistemic chances. The definition of such probabilities involves an interweaving of epistemic and physical considerations, and thus they cannot be classified as either purely epistemic or purely ontic. This conception, it will be argued, resolves some of the puzzles associated with statistical mechanical probabilities: it explains how probabilistic posits introduced on the basis of incomplete knowledge can yield testable predictions, and it also bypasses the problem of disastrous retrodictions, that is, the fact the standard equilibrium measures yield high probability of the system being in equilibrium in the recent past, even when we know otherwise. As the problem does not arise on the conception of probabilities considered here, there is no need to invoke a Past Hypothesis as a special posit to avoid it.

Jul 1, 20126 citations

Probabilities in Physics

Claus Beisbart, Stephan Hartmann

Abstract Many theories and models from physics are probabilistic. This observation raises several philosophical questions: What are probabilities in physics? Do they reflect objective chances which exist independently of the human mind? Or do they only express subjective credences and thus capture our own uncertainty about the world? Finally, which metaphysical lessons, if at all, can one draw from the largely probabilistic character of physics? The chapters collected in this volume address these questions and provide a detailed philosophical appraisal of the status of probabilities in all of physics. Particular emphasis is laid upon statistical physics and quantum mechanics. Many chapters reflect a desire to understand probabilities from physics as objective chances. These chances are characterized, e.g., as time-averages, as probabilities from a best system in the terms of David Lewis, or using the Boltzmannian typicality approach. Other chapters are sympathetic to a Bayesian view of probabilities in physics. The chapters about quantum mechanics elucidate the peculiar characteristics of quantum correlations and discuss strategies to justify the Born Rule. Finally, the chapters of this volume demonstrate how closely interpretive issues about probabilities are entangled with other foundational problems of physics such as the Reversibility Paradox, the ontology of the quantum world and the question whether the world is deterministic.

Sep 1, 2011130 citations

Probability and Irreversibility in Modern Statistical Mechanics: Classical and Quantum

David Wallace

Through extended consideration of two wide classes of case studies -- dilute gases and linear systems -- I explore the ways in which assumptions of probability and irreversibility occur in contemporary statistical mechanics, where the latter is understood as primarily concerned with the derivation of quantitative higher-level equations of motion, and only derivatively with underpinning the equilibrium concept in thermodynamics. I argue that at least in this wide class of examples, (i) irreversibility is introduced through a reasonably well-defined initial-state condition which does not precisely map onto those in the extant philosophical literature; (ii) probability is explicitly required both in the foundations and in the predictions of the theory. I then consider the same examples, as well as the more general context, in the light of quantum mechanics, and demonstrate that while the analysis of irreversibility is largely unaffected by quantum considerations, the notion of statistical-mechanical probability is entirely reduced to quantum-mechanical probability.

arXiv:2104.11223Apr 22, 202126 citations

Foundations of Statistical Mechanics—Two Approaches

Stephen Leeds

This paper is a discussion of David Albert's approach to the foundations of classical statistical menchanics. I point out a respect in which his account makes a stronger claim about the statistical mechanical probabilities than is usually made, and I suggest what might be motivation for this. I outline a less radical approach, which I attribute to Boltzmann, and I give some reasons for thinking that this approach is all we need, and also the most we are likely to get. The issue between the two accounts turns out to be one about the explanatory role probabilities play in statistical mechanics.

Philosophy of ScienceJan 1, 200341 citations

Probabilities are single-case or nothing

D. M. Appleby

Physicists have, hitherto, mostly adopted a frequentist conception of probability, according to which probability statements apply only to ensembles. It is argued that we should, instead, adopt an epistemic, or Bayesian, conception, in which probabilities are conceived as logical constructs rather than physical realities and in which probability statements do apply directly to individual events. The question is closely related to the disagreement between the orthodox school of statistical thought and the Bayesian school. It has important technical implications (it makes a difference what statistical methodology one adopts). It may also have important implications for the interpretation of the quantum state.

arXiv:quant-ph/0408058Optics and SpectroscopySep 1, 200516 citations

Probabilities are single-case, or nothing

D M Appleby

Physicists have, hitherto, mostly adopted a frequentist conception of probability, according to which probability statements apply only to ensembles. It is argued that we should, instead, adopt an epistemic, or Bayesian conception, in which probabilities are conceived as logical constructs rather than physical realities, and in which probability statements do apply directly to individual events. The question is closely related to the disagreement between the orthodox school of statistical thought and the Bayesian school. It has important technical implications (it makes a difference, what statistical methodology one adopts). It may also have important implications for the interpretation of the quantum state. 1 1.

Jan 1, 200418 citations