dc.contributor.author | Anta, Javier | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-11-29T18:12:07Z | |
dc.date.available | 2021-11-29T18:12:07Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2021 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Theoria 36(3) : 399-419 (2021) | |
dc.identifier.issn | 0495-4548 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10810/54187 | |
dc.description.abstract | In this paper I will argue that the two main approaches to statistical mechanics, that of Boltzmann and Gibbs, constitute two substantially different theoretical apparatuses. Particularly, I defend that this theoretical split must be philosophically understood as a separation of epistemic functions within this physical domain: while Boltzmannians are able to generate powerful explanations of thermal phenomena from molecular dynamics, Gibbsians can statistically predict observable values in a highly effective way. Therefore, statistical mechanics is a counterexample to Hempel's (1958) symmetry thesis, where the predictive capacity of a theory is directly correlated with its explanatory potential and vice versa. | |
dc.language.iso | eng | |
dc.publisher | Servicio Editorial de la Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatearen Argitalpen Zerbitzua | |
dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ | |
dc.title | The epistemic schism of statistical mechanics | |
dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/article | |
dc.rights.holder | © 2021 UPV/EHU Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1387/theoria.22134 | |