Everand Logo

Welcome to Everand!

  • Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

    Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

    Axiomatics of Classical Statistical Mechanics
    Axiomatics of Classical Statistical Mechanics
    Axiomatics of Classical Statistical Mechanics
    Ebook266 pages2 hours

    Axiomatics of Classical Statistical Mechanics

    By Rudolf Kurth

    5/5

    ()

    Read preview

    About this ebook

    Requiring only familiarity with elements of calculus and analytical geometry, this monograph constructs classical statistical mechanics as a deductive system, based on equations of motion and basic postulates of probability. 1960 edition.
    LanguageEnglish
    PublisherDover Publications
    Release dateApr 17, 2019
    ISBN9780486839783
    Axiomatics of Classical Statistical Mechanics

    Read more from Rudolf Kurth

    Related to Axiomatics of Classical Statistical Mechanics

    Titles in the series (100)

    View More
    View More

    Related ebooks

    Science & Mathematics For You

    View More
    View More

    Related podcast episodes

    Related articles

    • Article

      Actually, There Is a Time Like the Present

      Nov 30, 2017

      We’ve all heard it before: There’s no time like the present. Broadly speaking, of course, it means to “seize the opportunity right now,” or maybe in my case, to avoid procrastinating. From a psychological perspective, this makes a lot of sense. As hu

      4 min read

    • Article

      Chaos Makes the Multiverse Unnecessary

      Nov 29, 2018

      Scientists look around the universe and see amazing structure. There are objects and processes of fantastic complexity. Every action in our universe follows exact laws of nature that are perfectly expressed in a mathematical language. These laws of n

      17 min read

    • Article

      How Black Holes Nearly Ruined Time

      Jan 24, 2019

      An Introduction to the Black Hole Institute Fittingly, the Black Hole Initiative (BHI) was founded 100 years after Karl Schwarzschild solved Einstein’s equations for general relativity—a solution that described a black hole decades before the first a

      6 min read

    • Article

      The Math That Takes Newton Into the Quantum World

      Feb 28, 2019

      In my 50s, too old to become a real expert, I have finally fallen in love with algebraic geometry. As the name suggests, this is the study of geometry using algebra. Around 1637, René Descartes laid the groundwork for this subject by taking a plane,

      9 min read

    • Article

      Will Quantum Mechanics Swallow Relativity?: The contest between gravity and quantum physics takes a new turn.

      Oct 29, 2015

      It is the biggest of problems, it is the smallest of problems. At present physicists have two separate rulebooks explaining how nature works. There is general relativity, which beautifully accounts for gravity and all of the things it dominates: orbi

      17 min read

    • Article

      The Search For Wormholes

      Aug 11, 2022

      The Search For Wormholes
      11 min read

    • Article

      Physicists Attack Math’s $1,000,000 Question

      Apr 4, 2017

      Physicists are attempting to map the distribution of the prime numbers to the energy levels of a particular quantum system.

      4 min read

    • Article

      The Sacred, Spherical Cows of Physics: Theoretical physics milks symmetry to power its newest tool.

      May 1, 2014

      Early in their training, many physics students come across the idea of spherical cows. Cows in the real world—even at their most plump and well-fed—are hardly spherical, and this makes it tricky to calculate things like, say, how their volume or surf

      11 min read

    • Article

      Why Mathematicians Should Stop Naming Things After Each Other

      Sep 2, 2020

      Any student of modern math must know what it feels like to drown in a well of telescoping terminology. For a high-profile example, let’s take the Calabi-Yau manifold, made famous by string theory. A Calabi-Yau manifold is a compact, complex Kähler ma

      6 min read

    • Article

      What Keeps Black Holes From Expanding Everywhere?

      Dec 10, 2018

      Black holes are somehow able to grow constantly without changing their size. Physics might finally be able to explain why.

      4 min read

    • Article

      Do Parallel Universes Exist?

      Nov 4, 2021

      Do Parallel Universes Exist?
      5 min read

    • Article

      How the Universe Remembers Information

      Feb 28, 2019

      It was one of the great missed connections of physics. In 1965 a particle theorist derived a formula for the collision of elementary particles. Twenty years later two gravitation theorists, using completely different techniques, derived a formula for

      6 min read

    • Article

      The Metaphysical Baggage of Physics: Lee Smolin argues that time is more fundamental than physical laws.

      Jan 30, 2014

      An issue on time would not be complete without a conversation with Lee Smolin. High school dropout, theoretical physicist, and founding member of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Canada, Smolin’s life and work reflect many

      7 min read

    • Article

      The Theory Of Gravity

      Jan 20, 2022

      The Theory Of Gravity
      1 min read

    • Article

      A Universe Made of Tiny, Random Chunks: The space-time that makes up our universe is inherently uncertain.

      Jun 6, 2013

      One of science’s most crucial yet underappreciated achievements is the description of the physical universe using mathematics—in particular, using continuous, smooth mathematical functions, like how a sine wave describes both light and sound. This is

      6 min read

    • Article

      Schrödinger’s Cat When Nobody Is Looking

      Aug 26, 2020

      Some of the most perplexing topics in physics revolve around quantum theory. The quandary is seen most famously in the Schrödinger’s cat question and the issue of information loss in black hole evaporation. Richard Feynman said, “I think that I can s

      13 min read

    • Article

      The Universe Began With a Big Melt, Not a Big Bang

      Oct 5, 2017

      There are two tantalizing mysteries about our universe, one dealing with its final fate and the other with its beginning, that have intrigued cosmologists for decades. The community has always believed these to be independent problems—but what if the

      10 min read

    • Article

      The Trouble with Theories of Everything: There is no known physics theory that is true at every scale—there may never be.

      Oct 1, 2015

      Whenever you say anything about your daily life, a scale is implied. Try it out. “I’m too busy” only works for an assumed time scale: today, for example, or this week. Not this century or this nanosecond. “Taxes are onerous” only makes sense for a ce

      8 min read

    Related categories

    Reviews for Axiomatics of Classical Statistical Mechanics

    5/5

    1 rating0 reviews

    What did you think?

    Tap to rate

    Review must be at least 10 words

      Book preview

      Axiomatics of Classical Statistical Mechanics - Rudolf Kurth

      Mechanics

      CHAPTER I

      INTRODUCTION

      § 1. Statement of the problem

      In this book we shall consider mechanical systems of a finite number of degrees of freedom of which the equations of motion read

      t is the time variable; dots denote differentiation with respect to t, the xi’ i = 1,2, .... n, are Cartesian coordinates of the n-dimensional vector space Rn, which is also called the phase-space Γ of the system ; x is the vector or phase-point (x¹, x², ..., xn), and the Xi(x, t)’s are continuous functions of (x, t) defined for all values of (x, tof Γ and at each moment t, there is a uniquely determined solution

      of the system of differential equations (*) which satisfies the initial conditions

      Then the principal problem of mechanics reads: for a given force X(x,t) and a given initial condition to calculate or to characterize qualitatively the solution (**). In this formulation, the problem of general mechanics appears as a particular case of the initial value problem of the theory of ordinary differential equations. It is, in fact, a particular case since mechanics imposes certain restrictions on the functions Xi(x, t) which are not assumed in the general theory of differential equations. (Cf. §§ 6 and 10.)

      If the number n of such a system is known, the actual computation of the solution (**) is no longer practicable, not even approximately by numerical methods.

      But it is just this embarrassingly large number n which provides a way out, at least under certain conditions which will be given fully later: it now becomes possible to describe the average properties of these solutions, and it seems plausible to apply such average solutions in all cases in which, for any reason, the individual solutions cannot be known.

      The average behaviour of mechanical systems is the subject of statistical mechanics. Its principal problems, therefore, read: to define suitable concepts of the average properties of the solutions (**), to derive these average properties from the equations of motion (*); and to vindicate their application to individual systems. Before starting this programme in Chapter III, the principal mathematical tools which are required will be discussed in Chapter II.

      CHAPTER II

      MATHEMATICAL TOOLS

      § 2. Sets

      2.1. "A set is a collection of different objects, real or intellectual, into a whole. (Eine Menge ist die Zusammenfassung verschiedener Objekte unserer Anschauung oder unseres Denkens zu einem Ganzen"—CANTOR.) This sentence is not to be understood as a definition, but rather as the description of an elementary intellectual act or of the result of this act. Since it is an elementary act, which cannot be reduced to any other act or fact in our mind, the description cannot be other than vague. Nevertheless, everyone knows perfectly what is meant by, for instance, an expression such as the set of the vertices of a triangle.

      The objects collected in a set are called its elements and we say: the elements form or make the set, they belong to it, the set consists of the elements, it contains these elements, etc. The meaning of terms such as element of, forms, consists of, etc., is supposed to be known. The sentence, "s is an element of the set S", is abbreviated symbolically by the formula s ∈ S, and the sentence "the set S consists of the elements s1s2, ..." by the formula S = {s1s2, ...}

      It is formally useful to admit sets consisting of only one element (though there is nothing like collection or Zusammenfassung) and even to admit a set containing no element at all. The latter set is called an empty set.

      2.2. DEFINITIONS. A set S1 is called a subset of a set S if each element of S1 is contained in S. For this we write S1 ⊆ S or S ⊇ S1. If there is at least one element of S which does not belong to S1 the set is called a proper subset of the set S. In this case, we write S1 ⊂ S or S ⊃ S1. If for two sets S1 and S2 the relations S1 ⊆ S2 and S2 ⊆ S1 are valid at the same time, both sets are called equal and we write S1 = S2. The empty set is regarded as a subset of every set.

      A set is called finite if it consists of a finite number of elements. Otherwise it is called infinite. A set is called enumerable if there is an ordinal number (in the ordinary sense) for each element and, conversely, an element for each ordinal number, i.e. if there is a one-to-one correspondence between the elements of the set and the ordinal numbers. A sequence is defined as a finite or enumerable ordered set, i.e. a finite or enumerable set given in a particular enumeration. If any two elements of a sequence are equal (for example, numerically) they are still distinguished by the position within the sequence ; thus, as members of the sequence, they are to be considered as different.

      Let {S1S2 ...} be a set (or, as we prefer to say for linguistic reasons, an aggregate) of sets S1S2, ... ; then the sum (S1 + S2 + ...)of the sets S1S2, ... is defined as the set of all the elements contained in at least one of the sets S1, S2, ... . If the aggregate {S1,S2, ...} is finite or enumerable we denote the sum (S1 + S

      The intersection S1S2 ... or S1.S2 ... of the sets S1S2, ... is defined as the set of all the elements contained in each of the sets S1S2, ... . If the aggregate {S1S

      The (Cartesian) product S1 × S2 × ... of the sets of a finite or enumerable aggregate of sets S1S2, ... is defined as the aggregate of all the sequences {s1,s2 ...} where is any element of Sx y 1 of the (x,yx y 1.)

      Let S1 be a subset of S. Then the set of all the elements of S which are not contained in S1 is called the difference, S – S1 of both sets.

      The operations which produce sums, intersections, Cartesian products or differences of sets will be called (set) addition, intersection, (Cartesian) multiplication or subtraction.

      If all the sets occurring in a theory are subsets of a given fixed set S, this set S is called a space. Let S1 be a subset of a space S. Then the difference S – S1 is called the complement of the set S1.

      An aggregate A of subsets S1S2, ... of a space S is called an additive class if it satisfies the following conditions:

        (i) S is an element of A ;

       (ii) if S 1 is an element of A is also an element of A ;

      (iii) if each set S 1 , S 2 , ... of a finite or enumerable aggregate { S 1 S 2 , ...} of sets S 1 , S 2 , ... is an element of A , then the sum S 1 + S 2 + ... is also an element of A .

      Example. The aggregate of all the subsets of the space S is an additive class.

      2.3. THEOREMS. The addition and intersection of the sets of a finite or infinite system of sets S1, S2, ... are associative and commutative. Thus, in particular,

      (so that we may write without any brackets S1 + S2 + S3 and S1S2S3 for (S1 + S2) + S3 and (S1 S2)S3) and

      For the following pairs of set-operations the distributive law holds: addition and intersection, subtraction and intersection, addition and Cartesian multiplication, subtraction and Cartesian multiplication. Thus,

      These statements can be made intuitively evident by figures of the following kind:

      2.4. THEOREM. Let {S1S2, ...} be a finite or enumerable aggregate of finite or enumerable sets S1, S2, ... . Then the sum S1 + S2 + ... is a finite or enumerable set.

      Proof. Write

      Then the sequence {s11, s12, s21, s13, s22, s31, s14, s23, ...} yields an enumeration of S1 + S2 + ... . (The elements having already occurred in the enumeration have to be omitted.)

      2.5. THEOREM. The set of all rational numbers is enumerable.

      Proof. The set of all rational numbers can be represented as the sum of the following enumerable sets:

      Now apply Theorem 2.4.

      2.6. THEOREM. Let S1S2, ... be subsets of a space S, and let the complement of a set be denoted by an asterisk. Then

      Proof. Let s be an element of (S1 + S2 + ...)*, and denote by the symbol ∉ the negation of the relation ∈. Then

      Hence

      By inverting the chain of arguments, it follows that

      and both inequalities together imply the first statement. The proof of the second one is similar.

      2.7. THEOREM. Let {S1S2, ...} be a finite or enumerable aggregate of sets belonging to an additive class A. Then the intersection S1S2 ... is an element of A.

      Proof.

      (by Theorem 2.6).

      are elements of Ais an element of A, too.

      § 3. Mapping

      3.1. DEFINITIONS. Let X and Y be two sets (which need not be different), and suppose that to each element x of X there corresponds a unique element y of Y. (The same element of Y may correspond to different elements of X.) Then we write y = f(x) where x ∈ X, and say: y or f(x) is a function of x defined in the set X ; the set X is mapped into the set Y ; and the set of elements f(x) which correspond to the elements x of X is the image of the set X. It is denoted by f(X). If f(X) = Y (so that each element y of Y is the image f(x) of at least one element x of X), then the set X is said to be mapped on the set Y by the function f(x).

      Like the word collection (Zusammenfassung) in 2.1, the word correspondence denotes an elementary act of our mind which, by its nature, does not admit of a formal definition.

      If f(x) is a function defined in a set X such that f(x1) ≠ f(x2) for x1 ≠ x2, then the function (or the mapping) f is said to be bi-uniform. If Y = f(X) is the bi-uniform image of X, then to each element y of Y there corresponds exactly one element x of X such that y = f(x). This correspondence is called the inverse function of the function f and is denoted by f–1.

      3.2. THEOREM. Let f(x) be a function defined in a set X. Then, for any subsets X1, X2, ... of X,

      Proof. From

      it follows that

      f(X1) + f(X2) + ... ⊆ f(X1 + X2 + ...).

      Conversely, if x ∈ X1 + X2 ..., then x belongs to at least one of the sets X1, X2, and, therefore, f(x) belongs to at least one of the sets f(X1),f(X2), ... .

      Hence      f(X1 + X2 + ...) ⊆ f(X1) + f(X2) + ... .

      This yields, together with the above inequality, the first statement. The proofs of the other statements are similar.

      3.3. THEOREM. Let f(x) be a bi-uniform function defined in the set X. Then, for any subsets X1, X2, ... of X,

      f(X1X2 ...)

      Enjoying the preview?
      Page 1 of 1