The Gibbs paradox in statistical mechanics is usually resolved by saying that particles do not have distinct trajectories, and so are truly identical.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

For example, http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/physics/8-333-statistical-mechanics-i-statistical-mechanics-of-particles-fall-2007/lecture-notes/ [Broken] says "The above treatment of identical particles is somewhat artificial. This is because the concept of identical particles does not easily fit within the framework of classical mechanics. To implement the Hamiltonian equations of motion on a computer, one has to keep track of the coordinates of the N particles. The computer will have no difficulty in distinguishing exchanged particles. The indistinguishability of their phase spaces is in a sense an additional postulate of classical statistical mechanics. This problem is elegantly resolved within the framework of quantum statistical mechanics. Description of identical particles in quantum mechanics requires proper symmetrization of the wave function."

In the Bohmian interpretation identical particles have distinct trajectories, and so are not truly identical. How is the Gibbs paradox resolved in the Bohmian interpretation?

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Gibbs paradox in the Bohmian interpretation

Loading...

Similar Threads for Gibbs paradox Bohmian |
---|

I QFT paradox? |

A A question about the information loss paradox |

B Black hole information paradox and determinism |

I (Apparent?) paradoxes - Classical/Quantum theory predictions |

A Similarity in form of time-evolution and Gibbs weight? |

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**