Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If you need an accessible version of this item please contact JSTOR User Support

Los enfoques de Boltzmann y Gibbs frente al problema de la irreversibilidad (Boltzmann and Gibbs Approaches in the Problem of Irreversibility)

Olimpia Lombardi and Martín Labarca
Crítica: Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía
Vol. 37, No. 111 (Dec., 2005), pp. 39-81
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40104957
Page Count: 43
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Download ($10.00)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
If you need an accessible version of this item please contact JSTOR User Support
Los enfoques de Boltzmann y Gibbs frente al problema de la irreversibilidad (Boltzmann and Gibbs Approaches in the Problem of Irreversibility)
Preview not available

Abstract

El objetivo del presente trabajo consiste en analizar las diferencias entre los enfoques de Boltzmann y de Gibbs respecto del problema de la irreversibilidad. Dicho análisis nos permitirá poner de manifiesto que, en las discusiones acerca de las condiciones necesarias para la irreversibilidad, no suele advertirse que la diferencia central entre los dos enfoques consiste en la utilización de diferentes conceptos de equilibrio y, por tanto, de irreversibilidad. Finalmente se argumentará que, si bien inicialmente ambos enfoques parecen por completo irreconciliables, existen condiciones físicas definidas bajo las cuales los resultados que proporcionan ambos marcos teóricos se aproximan lo suficiente como para ser considerados igualmente admisibles desde el punto de vista de la práctica de la física. /// The aim of this paper is to analyze the differences between the approaches of Boltzmann and Gibbs with respect to the problem of irreversibility. This analysis will allow us to show that, in the discussion about the necessary conditions for irreversibility, it goes often unnoticed that the main difference between the two approaches is the use of different concepts of equilibrium and, as a consequence, of irreversibility. Finally, we will argue that, although in principie both approaches seem completely irreconcilable, there are definite physical conditions under which the results provided by both theoretical frameworks are similar enough to be considered equally admissible for all practical purposes.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
[39]
    [39]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
40
    40
  • Thumbnail: Page 
41
    41
  • Thumbnail: Page 
42
    42
  • Thumbnail: Page 
43
    43
  • Thumbnail: Page 
44
    44
  • Thumbnail: Page 
45
    45
  • Thumbnail: Page 
46
    46
  • Thumbnail: Page 
47
    47
  • Thumbnail: Page 
48
    48
  • Thumbnail: Page 
49
    49
  • Thumbnail: Page 
50
    50
  • Thumbnail: Page 
51
    51
  • Thumbnail: Page 
52
    52
  • Thumbnail: Page 
53
    53
  • Thumbnail: Page 
54
    54
  • Thumbnail: Page 
55
    55
  • Thumbnail: Page 
56
    56
  • Thumbnail: Page 
57
    57
  • Thumbnail: Page 
58
    58
  • Thumbnail: Page 
59
    59
  • Thumbnail: Page 
60
    60
  • Thumbnail: Page 
61
    61
  • Thumbnail: Page 
62
    62
  • Thumbnail: Page 
63
    63
  • Thumbnail: Page 
64
    64
  • Thumbnail: Page 
65
    65
  • Thumbnail: Page 
66
    66
  • Thumbnail: Page 
67
    67
  • Thumbnail: Page 
68
    68
  • Thumbnail: Page 
69
    69
  • Thumbnail: Page 
70
    70
  • Thumbnail: Page 
71
    71
  • Thumbnail: Page 
72
    72
  • Thumbnail: Page 
73
    73
  • Thumbnail: Page 
74
    74
  • Thumbnail: Page 
75
    75
  • Thumbnail: Page 
76
    76
  • Thumbnail: Page 
77
    77
  • Thumbnail: Page 
78
    78
  • Thumbnail: Page 
79
    79
  • Thumbnail: Page 
80
    80
  • Thumbnail: Page 
81
    81