Ive read a few courses on statistical mechanics, and while their textual explanations and example choices differ, the flow of information from microscopy to macroscopy seems the same, and reading between the lines you can see some mathematical construct. Has statistical mechanics been formalized in the sense that say analysis has been formalized (down to quantifiers, sets, functions,...) more rigorously? Where can one find a formal axiomatic approach to statistical mechanics as opposed to an introductory descriptory approach?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
I have an hydrogenic atom, knowing that its ground-state wavefunction has the standard form ψ=Ae−βr with $A = \frac{\bet...
-
At room temperature, play-dough is solid(ish). But if you make a thin strip it cannot just stand up on it's own, so is it still solid? O...
-
Sometimes I am born in silence, Other times, no. I am unseen, But I make my presence known. In time, I fade without a trace. I harm no one, ...
-
I want to know what happens to the space a black hole crosses over as our galaxy travels through space.
-
I'm sitting in a room next to some totally unopened cans of carbonated soft drinks (if it matters — the two affected cans are Coke Zero...
-
This image from NASA illustrates drag coefficients for several shapes: It is generally accepted that some variation of the teardrop/airfoil...
-
What exactly are the spikes, or peaks and valleys, caused by in pictures such as these Wikipedia states that "From the point of view of...
No comments:
Post a Comment