Proceedings

EPJ H Highlight - Deciphering Boltzmann’s response to Loschmidt’s paradox

alt
Boltzmann’s reaction has baffled modern readers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Ludwig_Boltzmann#

New analysis offers a clarified translation and detailed commentary of Boltzmann’s original reaction to Loschmidt’s paradox

In 1876, Austrian physicist Josef Loschmidt published his ‘reversibility paradox,’ arguing that the time-symmetric processes demanded by fundamental physics are at odds with the second law of thermodynamics. A few months later, Loschmidt’s friend Ludwig Boltzmann, renowned for his statistical interpretation of thermodynamics, published his reaction to the paradox. However, the convoluted nature of his response has long remained baffling to modern readers. Through new analysis published in EPJ H, Olivier Darrigol at the CNRS in France clarifies Boltzmann’s main points, through a new translation and detailed commentary of his 1877 text.

Time-reversal symmetry is a central concept in fundamental physics: describing processes which look the same, regardless of whether time flows forwards or backwards. At the same time, entropy is an inherent physical property of isolated thermodynamic systems, and must always increase as time flows forwards: an idea expressed by the second law of thermodynamics. In his paradox, Loschmidt argued that the stark differences between these two ideas suggested that the second law of thermodynamics cannot be a general theory.

Boltzmann’s reply to his friend’s ideas contained the essential principles of his statistical interpretation of thermodynamics. Compared with his later texts, however, his response is widely seen as difficult to interpret: for reasons including his lack of precise terminology for basic concepts; his mixing of personal intuition with established theories; and his sometimes convoluted writing style.

In a new paper, Darrigol recalls the context of Boltzmann’s argument, offers a new translation of his text, and provides a sentence-by-sentence commentary. In addition, he gives a condensed and clarified summary of Boltzmann’s main points, and offers a criticism of the work – inspired by Boltzmann’s later ideas on the topic, expressed decades later in the 1890s. Ultimately, the new text aims to make Boltzmann’s text understandable to a variety of readers, and to provide fresh insights into his early interpretations of statistical thermodynamics.

O Darrigol, Boltzmann’s reply to the Loschmidt paradox: a commented translation, EPJ H 46, 29 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjh/s13129-021-00029-2

This was our first experience of publishing with EPJ Web of Conferences. We contacted the publisher in the middle of September, just one month prior to the Conference, but everything went through smoothly. We have had published MNPS Proceedings with different publishers in the past, and would like to tell that the EPJ Web of Conferences team was probably the best, very quick, helpful and interactive. Typically, we were getting responses from EPJ Web of Conferences team within less than an hour and have had help at every production stage.
We are very thankful to Solange Guenot, Web of Conferences Publishing Editor, and Isabelle Houlbert, Web of Conferences Production Editor, for their support. These ladies are top-level professionals, who made a great contribution to the success of this issue. We are fully satisfied with the publication of the Conference Proceedings and are looking forward to further cooperation. The publication was very fast, easy and of high quality. My colleagues and I strongly recommend EPJ Web of Conferences to anyone, who is interested in quick high-quality publication of conference proceedings.

On behalf of the Organizing and Program Committees and Editorial Team of MNPS-2019, Dr. Alexey B. Nadykto, Moscow State Technological University “STANKIN”, Moscow, Russia. EPJ Web of Conferences vol. 224 (2019)

ISSN: 2100-014X (Electronic Edition)

© EDP Sciences