I Exceptions to the postulate of equal a priori probabilities?

AndreasC
Gold Member
Messages
555
Reaction score
317
Not sure if this is the appropriate forum for this, hopefully if it isn't someone can move it to a more appropriate place.

The fundamental postulate of equal a priori probabilities in statistical physics asserts that all accessible microstates states in an ensemble happen with equal probability. It is an important assumption for proving a number of important results, like the form of the partition functions in microcanonical and canonical ensembles etc. My question is, are there any significant cases that statistical physics still deals with where equal a priori probabilities can not be assumed and other assumptions have to be made?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For instance, there's this system of coupled oscillators that can get "stuck" in some part of energy-allowed phase space and the energy doesn't partition to all degrees of freedom until some time has passed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi–Pasta–Ulam–Tsingou_problem

But this kind of things are something that would probably be called "metastable states" in statistical physics terminology.
 
Last edited:
In general, equal apriori probabilities are not a postulate but must be derived from the dynamics. However, in all but the most simple cases, this is mathematically very difficult and rarely of practical importance. Thus, this problem is usually sidestepped and the probabilities are just postulated. This is fine in practice, but you have to keep in mind that such a postulate is not independent of the dynamics and could in principle contradict it. Integrable systems are a typical example for this situation. E.g., in the two-body problem, no non-trivial set of initial conditions will lead to a thermal state if you just wait long enough.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes PeroK and AndreasC
Nullstein said:
This is fine in practice, but you have to keep in mind that such a postulate is not independent of the dynamics and could in principle contradict it.
Yeah, this has been my understanding so far, that's why I was interested in examples where this can't be assumed.
Nullstein said:
no non-trivial set of initial conditions will lead to a thermal state if you just wait long enough.
How is a thermal state defined? Furthermore, can equal probabilities be assumed in all such states?
 
AndreasC said:
How is a thermal state defined? Furthermore, can equal probabilities be assumed in all such states?
Typically, a closed, sufficiently chaotic system is expected to have a microcanonical ensemble as equilibrium distribution, which is just an equal probability distribution on a constant energy surface (or constant integrals of motion surface, more generally). An open subsystem that can exchange energy will then typically end up in a canonical ensemble. The canonical ensemble has this constant energy only on avergage, with configurations closer to this constant energy surface being more likely.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and PeroK
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In her YouTube video Bell’s Theorem Experiments on Entangled Photons, Dr. Fugate shows how polarization-entangled photons violate Bell’s inequality. In this Insight, I will use quantum information theory to explain why such entangled photon-polarization qubits violate the version of Bell’s inequality due to John Clauser, Michael Horne, Abner Shimony, and Richard Holt known as the...
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
I asked a question related to a table levitating but I am going to try to be specific about my question after one of the forum mentors stated I should make my question more specific (although I'm still not sure why one couldn't have asked if a table levitating is possible according to physics). Specifically, I am interested in knowing how much justification we have for an extreme low probability thermal fluctuation that results in a "miraculous" event compared to, say, a dice roll. Does a...
Back
Top