A Entropy increase in proton/proton collision?

Twodogs
Messages
74
Reaction score
6
TL;DR Summary
Inquiry into energy transfer in nucleon collision at moderate velocity
Does entropy increase when two protons collide at moderate velocity? Is momentum of one fully transferred to the other. Is the vector coming in more certain than the vector going out after the event. I guess the answer might invoke the uncertainty principle but is there some certainty with regard to entropy. Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think we cannot apply concept of entropy to a particle-particle collision even in QM. Boltzmann H theorem may be a bridge to entropy, but I am not sure of it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Lord Jestocost
In statistical physics, entropy is not a property of the system as such, but a property of one's description of the system. For that purpose one first needs to decide what one means by "entropy". In the quantum context by entropy one usually means von Neumann (vN) entropy, but there are also other notions of entropy (see e.g. Sec. 5.3 in my https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.10500 ). If you compute the full wave function of the two protons after the collision, then vN entropy is not increasing in your description. If, on the other hand, you find the computation of wave function too complicated, so you compute only the mixed density matrix, then vN entropy increases.
 
  • Like
Likes Lord Jestocost
Demystifier said:
In statistical physics, entropy is not a property of the system as such, but a property of one's description of the system.
Thank you. Interesting distinction that. Need to consider.
Shouldering my way in a classical realm I tend to acquire rules of thumb, one being that whenever you turn mechanical energy not all of it makes the corner, some leaks away in heat, sound or even electromagnetic energy. Here 'turn' being a change produced by interaction of two solid bodies. Examples would be rustling of leaves in a breeze, the squeal of the wheel trucks of a coal train going round a corner or the breaking of crystals which can emit photons or even generate radio waves. Thus energy is conserved but dispersed and entropy is increased.
Given that this is roughly stated, can we make a general statement that any energy transformation (classical) produces an increase in entropy? If that is true, then it may not hold for quantum events.
I hope that somehow this is clear enough for comment, if not, no stress.
I thought your paper was well spoken and clear of intention. I had some Braille-like appreciation of the mathematics. Seems as though its thesis is moving against the tides for the moment.
 
Twodogs said:
Given that this is roughly stated, can we make a general statement that any energy transformation (classical) produces an increase in entropy?
In theory no, in practice yes. For example, in theory, an elastic collision of billiard balls does not produce entropy. But in practice, the collision of billiard balls is never perfectly elastic.
 
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
I am reading WHAT IS A QUANTUM FIELD THEORY?" A First Introduction for Mathematicians. The author states (2.4 Finite versus Continuous Models) that the use of continuity causes the infinities in QFT: 'Mathematicians are trained to think of physical space as R3. But our continuous model of physical space as R3 is of course an idealization, both at the scale of the very large and at the scale of the very small. This idealization has proved to be very powerful, but in the case of Quantum...
Back
Top