Probability and statistical mechanics

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the role of probabilities in statistical mechanics, exploring why this field relies on probabilistic approaches despite being rooted in classical mechanics. Participants examine the implications of dealing with large systems and the challenges of predicting outcomes in such contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why statistical mechanics uses probabilities, noting that classical mechanics allows for predictions if all parameters are known.
  • Another participant explains that probabilities simplify the analysis of systems with numerous possible arrangements, such as air particles in a container, where predicting exact outcomes is impractical.
  • A third participant emphasizes the challenge of determining initial conditions in systems with a large number of degrees of freedom, suggesting that probability is the only viable method for making predictions.
  • A later reply discusses the impracticality of knowing all trajectories over time, arguing that averages provide a more manageable representation of system behavior compared to tracking numerous functions of time.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the impracticality of deterministic predictions in statistical mechanics due to the complexity of systems, but they explore different aspects of why probabilities are necessary without reaching a consensus on the underlying reasons.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the limitations of classical mechanics in the context of statistical mechanics, particularly regarding the measurement of initial conditions in large systems, but do not resolve these issues.

erty
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
(I didn't know where to put this one, so somebody will eventually move it, I predict...)

This is a absolute newbie-question, so don't be evil!

Why does statistical mechanics deal with probabilities?
ASAIK, statistical mechanics is built on classical mechanics, where it is possible to predict the infinite future, if all the parameters of a system is known.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It uses probabilities because it would be a major headache otherwise.

Imagine a container full of air particles. There is a ton of different arrangements possible, and the arrangements are always changing. Therefore it's easy to look at it in terms of the most probable "state" instead of trying to analyze each one individually.

And then there is also quantum mechanics where it seems impossible to observe an event without affecting it, so we can only deal with probabilities as well.

I guess the short answer is that at the atomic level, so many different things are possible, that it is practically impossible to predict EXACTLY what will happen. This is why we use probabilities.
 
erty said:
Why does statistical mechanics deal with probabilities?
ASAIK, statistical mechanics is built on classical mechanics, where it is possible to predict the infinite future, if all the parameters of a system is known.
Your last line conveys the key difficulty.
For systems with a large (read humongous) number of degrees of freedom it is practically impossible to determine the initial state. Take a mole of atoms in a container (like an ideal gas). To determine the initial condition you need the simultaneous measurement of N_A (Avogadro's number) positions and momenta. It is practically without meaning. Probability allows the only hope for predictions.
 
To add on, let's consider what would happen if we somehow knew all the trajectories for all time. What does this tell us? Okay, we know "everything" about the system, but that's a ridiculous amount of information to make sense of. Really, the averages are a very good representation of the behavior of the system (read Landau & Lif****z for a proof that the standard deviation for such a system goes like [tex]1/\sqrt{N}[/tex]), but it's one or a few numbers rather than [tex]6 N[/tex] functions of time. Which one would you rather deal with?

Edit: Are you serious? This thing blanks out Lifsitz' name?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K