Boltzmann (Wikipedia) |
PreambleProbably the most important achievement for humans is the ability to produce scientific discoveries, that helps us objectively understand how nature works and build artificial tools where no other species can. Entropy is an elusive concept and one of the crown achievements of human race. We question here if causal inference and Loschmidt's paradox can be reconciled.
Mimicking analogies are not physical
Before even try to understand what is a physical entropy, we should make sure that there is only one kind of physical entropy from thermodynamics, formulated by Gibbs-Boltzmann ($S_{G}$ and $S_{B}$). Other entropies such as Shannon's information entropy are all analogies to physics, and mimicking concepts.
Why counting microstates are associated with time?
The following definition of entropy is due to Boltzmann but Gibbs' formulation tend to provide equivalence, technically different formulations aside, they are actually equivalent.
Definition 1: An entropy of a macroscopic material is associated with larger number of states its constituted elements take different states, $\Omega$. This is associated with $S_{B}$, Boltzmann's entropy.
Now, as we know from basic thermodynamics classes that entropy change of a system can not decrease, so the time's arrow.
Definition 2: Time's arrow is identified with change in entropy of material systems, that $\delta S \ge 0$.
We put aside the distinction between open and close systems and equilibrium and non-equilibrium dynamics, but concentrate on how come counting system's state's are associated with time's arrow?
Loschimidt's Paradox: Irreversible occupancy on discrete states and causal inference
The core idea probably can be explained via discrete lattice and occupancy on them over chain of dynamics.
Conjecture 1: Occupancy of $N$ items on $M$ discrete states, $M>N$, evolving with dynamical rules $\mathscr{D}$ necessarily increases $\Omega$, compare to the number of sampling if it were $M=N$.
This conjecture might explain the entropy increase, but irreversibility of the dynamical rule $\mathscr{D}$ is required addressing Loschimidt's Paradox, i.e., how to generate irreversible evolution given time-reversal dynamics. Actually, do-calculus may provide a language to resolve this, by inducing interventional notation on Boltzmann's H-theorem with Pearlian view. The full definition of H-function is a bit more involved, but here we summarise it in condensed form with a do operator version of it.
Conjecture 2 (H-Theorem do-conjecture): Boltzmann's H-function provides a basis for entropy increase, it is associated with conditional probability of a system $\mathscr{S}$ being in state $X$ on ensemble $\mathscr{E}$. Hence, $P(X|\mathscr{E})$. Then, an irreversible evolution from time-reversal dynamics should use interventional notation, $P(X|do(\mathscr{E}))$. Then information on how time reversal dynamics leads to time's arrow encoded on, how dynamics provides an interventional ensembles, $do(\mathscr{E})$.
Conclusion
We provided some hints on why would counting states lead to time's arrow, an irreversible dynamics. In the light of the development of mathematical language for causal inference in statistics, the concepts are converging. Along with understanding Loschmidt's Paradox via do-calculus, it can establish an asymmetric notation. Loschmidt's question is long standing problem in physics and philosophy with great practical implications in different physical sciences.
Further reading
- Loschimid's Paradox
- H-Theorem
- do-Calculus revisited, J. Pearl (2012) pdf
- Causal Inference : Looper Repository for collection of resources.
- H-theorem do-conjecture, M. Süzen, arxiv:2310.01458 (2023)
No comments:
Post a Comment