http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/Definition-of-Complexity-tp522229p522265.html
OK, I think I'm getting it. It really is down to whether the microlanguage
inverse square laws. But my microlanguage either involves gravitons (if I'm
a particle physicist) or curved spacetime (if I'm a general relativist). The
descriptions of entropy). So gravity is emergent.
>
> On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 06:46:12PM -0600, Robert Holmes wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >One can certainly start from the partition function. But the partition
> > >function is something that is additional to the microscopic
> > >description, hence emergent. Indeed, the partition function is
> > >different depending on whether you are using microcanonical, canonical
> > >or grand canonical ensembles, each of which is a thermodynamic, not
> > >microscopic concept.
> >
> >
> > I'm surprised that you consider the partition function as being "in
> > addition" to the microscopic description. Is this the common view in
> > statistical mechanics? Just to be specific, if I've got a system of
> > distinguishable particles and the energy levels aren't degenerate, the
> > single particle partition function Zsp is given by:
> >
> > Zsp = sum( exp( -ei/k.T ) )
> > where ei is the energy of the energy level i, the sum is over all i (i.e
> .
> > over all energy levels), k is the Boltzmann constant and T is the
> > temperature.
> >
> > Now that seems about as microscopic description of a system as you can
> get.
> > Could you explain why it's not please?
> >
> > Thanks for your patience!
> >
> > Robert
>
> You have just written the canonical partition function. This assumes
> that the universe is divided into two parts, the system, and its
> environment, and that these are in thermal contact with each other.
>
> If you further assume that particles can move between the system and
> environment, then you get the grand canonical partition function:
>
> Z=\sum_{N=0}^{\infty}\sum_{{n_i}}\prod_i exp(-n_i(E_i-\mu)/kT)
>
> These assumptions are not microscopic in nature, but how we choose
> to divide up physical reality. (The choice is needn't be arbitrary - in
> most stat phys situations, there is a clear "best choice", and choosing
> any other way of looking at the system is crazy, but you must
> recognise that it is still a choice independent of microscopic dynamics).
>
> Cheers
>
> --
> *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
> is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a
> virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this
> email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you
> may safely ignore this attachment.
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
> Mathematics 0425 253119 (")
> UNSW SYDNEY 2052 R.Standish at unsw.edu.au
> Australia
>
http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks> International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at
http://www.friam.org>
URL: /pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20060726/ba85b295/attachment-0001.html