Daniel Sirtes and Eric Oberheim : Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies Daniel Sirtes (Basel) and Eric Oberheim (HU Berlin)

Daniel Sirtes and Eric Oberheim : Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies Outline 1.Einstein’s Prediction, Perrin’s Confirmation and the revision of Classical Thermodynamics 2.Kuhn’s monistic 2-phase model of scientific advance 3.Feyerabend’s in principle argument for pluralism 4.The History of Brownian Motion revisited (again) 5.Conclusions

Daniel Sirtes and Eric Oberheim : Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies 1. Einstein’s Prediction, Perrin’s Confirmation and the revision of Classical Thermodynamics Einstein’s 1905 paper on Brownian Motion: (“Über die von der molekularkinetischen Theorie der Wärme geforderte Bewegung von in ruhenden Flüssigkeiten suspendierten Teilchen”) begins:

Daniel Sirtes and Eric Oberheim : Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies “ If the movement discussed here can actually be observed […] then classical thermodynamics can no longer be looked upon as applicable with precision to bodies even of dimensions distinguishable in a microscope; […] On the other hand, had the prediction of this movement proved to be incorrect, a weighty argument would be provided against the molecular-kinetic conception of heat.” (Einstein, 1905)

Daniel Sirtes and Eric Oberheim : Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies Einstein made quantitative predictions of Brownian Motion Jean Perrin confirmed these predictions experimentally ( ) Even the most orthodox adherents of classical thermodynamics (e.g Wolfgang Ostwald) were convinced that the theory had only a limited validity and had to be revised; and that its energicist metaphysics must be omitted.

Daniel Sirtes and Eric Oberheim : Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies 2. Kuhn’s Monistic 2-phase Model of Scientific Advance

Daniel Sirtes and Eric Oberheim : Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies Paradigm 1 Unsolved puzzles/possible anomalies Crisis RevolutionParadigm 2 Unsolvable puzzle/crisis causing anomaly Normal Science Extra- ordinary Science

Daniel Sirtes and Eric Oberheim : Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies Kuhn’s model is monistic –There is no need for alternatives –Normal science discovers its own anomalies Kuhn’s normal science is (quasi-) dogmatic: –It is neither necessary nor helpful to question basic assumptions –Puzzle-solving generates unsolvable puzzles –Unsolvable puzzles can lead to crisis Kuhn’s model has 2 distinct phases –Basic assumptions should only be challenged in crisis –Proliferation has a fruitful role only in crisis –Crisis eventually leads to a revolution

Daniel Sirtes and Eric Oberheim : Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies 3. Feyerabend’s in principle argument for pluralism Feyerabend criticized Kuhn’s model, especially the idea of normal science Feyerabend claimed that pluralism and anti-dogma- tism are crucial elements of the scientific ethos Moreover, pluralism and anti-dogmatism are impor- tant to scientific progress Feyerabend developed the following philosophical argument for pluralism out of the history of science:

Daniel Sirtes and Eric Oberheim : Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies Importation of anomalies Paradigm 1 Paradigm 2 Anomaly Crisis Paradigm 2 * Problem Solved Problem

Daniel Sirtes and Eric Oberheim : Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies Indirect Refutation of Classical Thermodynamics CTD STD ECH  MKCH BM

Daniel Sirtes and Eric Oberheim : Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies 4. The History of Brownian Motion revisited (again) Ronald Laymon contests Feyerabend´s view. He claims that even without the help of an alternative theory, it was possible to acknowledge BM as an anomaly for classical thermodynamics by excluding all other possible explanations. To substantiate his claim, he refers to Léon Gouy´s experiments of concomitant variation (1888, 1889 & 1895). However, Laymon does not take into account four important historical facts:

Daniel Sirtes and Eric Oberheim : Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies 1.BM’s relevance to the 2 nd Law of Thermodynamics was not recognized between 1828 (Brown’s Paper) and 1888 (Gouy’s Paper). It was recognized as an anomaly only after the kinetic theory of gas was formulated by Boltzmann & Maxwell (1866).

Daniel Sirtes and Eric Oberheim : Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies 2. Gouy was a fervent atomist. His claim to have excluded all other possible expla- nations was motivated by his atomist ideas. It was only (if at all) convincing to scientists who had already accepted atomism, and who already thought that the statistical theory of heat was superior to the energicists’ theory of thermodynamics.

Daniel Sirtes and Eric Oberheim : Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies 3.The most widely accepted theory about BM before the turn of the century (i.e. even after Gouy’s publications) was still Sigmund Exner’s theory that BM is due to small currents in the fluid, which does not conflict with the principles of classical thermo- dynamics.

Daniel Sirtes and Eric Oberheim : Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies 4.Henri Poincaré concluded his talk at the Congress of Arts and Sciences in St. Louis (1904) presenting Boltzmann´s ideas and Gouy’s experimental results on the exclusion of concomitant variation with these words: “I hasten to say we are not yet there, and as yet nothing proves that the principles [of classical thermodynamics] will not come forth from the combat victorious and intact” (Poincaré, 1904)

Daniel Sirtes and Eric Oberheim : Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies 5. Conclusions BM’s relevance to the 2 nd Law of CTD was only established after an alternative formulation existed. A direct refutation of CTD’s formulation of the 2 nd Law was not possible. An (indirect) refutation of the 2 nd Law of CTD was only possible through Einstein’s predictions and Perrin’s confirmation.

Daniel Sirtes and Eric Oberheim : Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies 5. Conclusions Therefore: Einstein’s explanation of BM is an example of an importation of an anomaly that could not have been detected without an alternative. This argument supports a plea for more pluralism in science – as otherwise potential anomalies might go undetected, hindering scientific advance.

Daniel Sirtes and Eric Oberheim : Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies Einstein, Entropy and Anomalies Daniel Sirtes (Basel) and Eric Oberheim (HU Berlin)