Quick Navigation
Topics
Entanglement Theory Quantum Correlations
Quantum Entropy Information Measures
Open Quantum Systems Decoherence
Quantum Simulation
A Man Misunderstood: Von Neumann did not claim that his entropy corresponds to the phenomenological thermodynamic entropy
arXiv
Authors: Erin Sheridan
Year
2020
Paper ID
22259
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
190
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Recently, attention has returned to the now-famous 1932 thought experiment in which John von Neumann establishes the form of the quantum mechanical von Neumann entropy -Tr ρln ρ $SVN$, supposedly by arguing for its correspondence with the phenomenological thermodynamic entropy $STD$. Hemmo and Shenker (2006) reconstruct von Neumann's thought experiment and argue that it fails to establish this desired correspondence. Prunkl (2019) and Chua (2019) challenge Hemmo and Shenker's result in turn. This paper aims to provide a new foundation for the current debate by revisiting the original text (von Neumann (1996, 2018)). A thorough exegesis of von Neumann's cyclical gas transformation is put forth, along with a reconstruction of two additional thought experiments from the text. This closer look reveals that von Neumann's goal is not to establish a link between SVN and STD, as is assumed throughout the current debate, but rather to establish a correspondence between SVN and the Gibbs statistical mechanical entropy SG. On these grounds I argue that the existing literature misunderstands and misrepresents his goals. A revised understanding is required before the success of von Neumann's reversible gas transformation can be definitively granted or denied.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2020 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- Recently, attention has returned to the now-famous 1932 thought experiment in which John von Neumann establishes the form of the quantum mechanical von Neumann entropy -Tr ρln...
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.