On the explanation for quantum statistics

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 37 (1):192-211 (2006)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The concept of classical indistinguishability is analyzed and defended against a number of well-known criticisms, with particular attention to the Gibbs’paradox. Granted that it is as much at home in classical as in quantum statistical mechanics, the question arises as to why indistinguishability, in quantum mechanics but not in classical mechanics, forces a change in statistics. The answer, illustrated with simple examples, is that the equilibrium measure on classical phase space is continuous, whilst on Hilbert space it is discrete. The relevance of names, or equivalently, properties stable in time that can be used as names, is also discussed.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,505

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Hilbert space quantum mechanics is noncontextual.Robert B. Griffiths - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 44 (3):174-181.
Is quantum mechanics pointless?Frank Arntzenius - 2003 - Philosophy of Science 70 (5):1447-1457.
Quantum mechanics does not require the continuity of space.B. E. - 2003 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 34 (2):319-328.
Classical versus Quantum Ontology-Book Review Essay: D. Home, Conceptual Foundations of Quantum Mechanics.P. Busch - forthcoming - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
191 (#128,803)

6 months
17 (#176,115)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Simon Saunders
Oxford University

Citations of this work

Are quantum particles objects?Simon Saunders - 2006 - Analysis 66 (1):52-63.
Discerning Fermions.Simon Saunders & F. A. Muller - 2008 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59 (3):499 - 548.
Inherent Properties and Statistics with Individual Particles in Quantum Mechanics.Matteo Morganti - 2009 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 40 (3):223-231.
Compendium of the foundations of classical statistical physics.Jos Uffink - 2006 - In J. Butterfield & J. Earman (eds.), Handbook of the philosophy of physics. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

View all 34 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Are quantum particles objects?Simon Saunders - 2006 - Analysis 66 (1):52-63.
Quantum Mechanics: An Empiricist View.Paul Teller & Bas C. van Fraassen - 1995 - Philosophical Review 104 (3):457.
Physics and Leibniz's principles.Simon Saunders - 2002 - In Katherine Brading & Elena Castellani (eds.), Symmetries in Physics: Philosophical Reflections. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 289--307.
Points, particles, and structural realism.Oliver Pooley - 2006 - In Dean Rickles, Steven French & Juha T. Saatsi (eds.), The Structural Foundations of Quantum Gravity. Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press. pp. 83--120.
Points, particles, and structural realism.Oliver Pooley - 2006 - In Dean Rickles, Steven French & Juha T. Saatsi (eds.), The Structural Foundations of Quantum Gravity. Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press. pp. 83--120.

View all 12 references / Add more references