Abstract

While the fundamental laws of physics are time-reversal invariant, most macroscopic processes are irreversible. Given that the fundamental laws are taken to underpin all other processes, how can the fundamental time-symmetry be reconciled with the asymmetry manifest elsewhere? In statistical mechanics (SM), progress can be made with this question. What I dub the ‘Zwanzig–Zeh–Wallace framework’ can be used to construct the irreversible equations of SM from the underlying microdynamics. Yet this framework uses coarse-graining, a procedure that has faced much criticism. I focus on two objections in the literature: claims that coarse-graining makes time-asymmetry (i) ‘illusory’ and (ii) ‘anthropocentric’. I argue that these objections arise from an unsatisfactory justification of coarse-graining prevalent in the literature, rather than from coarse-graining itself. This justification relies on the idea of measurement imprecision. By considering the role that abstraction and autonomy play, I provide an alternative justification and offer replies to the illusory and anthropocentric objections. Finally, I consider the broader consequences of this alternative justification: the connection to debates about inter-theoretic reduction and the implication that the time-asymmetry in SM is weakly emergent. 1Introduction 1.1Prospectus2The Zwanzig–Zeh–Wallace Framework3Why Does This Method Work? 3.1The special conditions account3.2When is a density forwards-compatible?4Anthropocentrism and Illusion: Two Objections 4.1The two objections in more detail4.2Against the justification by measurement imprecision5An Alternative Justification 5.1ion and autonomy5.2An illustration: the Game of Life6Reply to Illusory7Reply to Anthropocentric8The Wider Landscape: Concluding Remarks 8.1Inter-theoretic relations8.2The nature of irreversibility

Highlights

  • 1.1 Prospectus3.1 The special conditions account 3.2 When is a density forwards-compatible? 4 Anthropocentrism and Illusion: Two Objections 4.1 The two objections in more detail 4.2 Against the justification by measurement imprecision ß The Author(s) 2018

  • This leads to a traditional problem: given that the fundamental laws are taken to underpin all other processes, how can the fundamental time-symmetry be reconciled with the asymmetry manifest elsewhere?

  • In the debate about coarsegraining, intersubjective disagreement is not the issue. Rather it is the second kind of subjectivity (:Objectivity2) that is at stake, which I earlier dubbed anthropocentrism

Read more

Summary

The Zwanzig–Zeh–Wallace Framework 3 Why Does This Method Work?

3.1 The special conditions account 3.2 When is a density forwards-compatible? 4 Anthropocentrism and Illusion: Two Objections 4.1 The two objections in more detail 4.2 Against the justification by measurement imprecision ß The Author(s) 2018. 3.1 The special conditions account 3.2 When is a density forwards-compatible? 4 Anthropocentrism and Illusion: Two Objections 4.1 The two objections in more detail 4.2 Against the justification by measurement imprecision ß The Author(s) 2018. Licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is doi:10.1093/bjps/axy properly cited

Introduction
Prospectus
The Zwanzig–Zeh–Wallace Framework
Why Does This Method Work?
The special conditions account
When is a density forwards-compatible?
Anthropocentrism and Illusion
13 The difference between t0 for Options 1 and 2 is dramatic
The two objections in more detail
Conclusion
Against the justification by measurement imprecision
An Alternative Justification
Abstraction and autonomy
An illustration: the Game of Life
Reply to Illusory
Reply to Anthropocentric
Concluding Remarks
Inter-theoretic relations
The nature of irreversibility
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call