No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Some Considerations of Entropy Change
1.T. Ehrenfest and P. Ehrenfest, Sitzber. Kaiserl. Akad. Wiss. Wien, Math. Naturw. Klasse, 15, 89 (1906);
1.L. Van Hove, Physica 21, 512 (1955);
1.L. Van Hove, 22, 243 (1956); , Physica (Amsterdam)
1.L. Van Hove, 23, 441 (1957): , Physica (Amsterdam)
1.I. Prigogine, Non‐Equilibrium Statistical Mechanics (Interscience, New York, 1962);
1.E. W. Montroll, in Lectures in Theoretical Physics (Gordon and Breach, New York, 1960), Vol. III, p. 221;
1.P. H. E. Meijer and J. C. Edwards, Phys. Rev. A 1, 1527 (1970).
2.A. Isihara, J. Phys. A. (Proc. Phys. Soc.) 1, 539 (1968);
2.J. Math. Anal. Appl., to be published.
3.This is weaker than the constraint imposed in the second paper of Ref. 2. The sufficiency of this relaxed condition has been independently observed by J. M. Richardson (private communication).
4.When we notice a trivial identity then Eqs. (2. 5) and (2. 6) imply dim for the dimensions of matrices A and B. For a finite‐dimensional space, the condition (2.6) automatically implies a stronger result provided that we insist In other words, the genuine inequality in Eq. (2.6) is physically possible only for infinite‐dimensional cases.
5.R. E. Peierls, Phys. Rev. 54, 918 (1938).
6.E.g., see, M. L. Goldberger and K. M. Watson, Collision Theory (Wiley, New York, 1965), p. 211.
7.J. G. Kirkwood, J. Chem. Phys. 14, 180 (1940);
7.M. S. Green, J. Chem. Phys. 25, 836 (1956); , J. Chem. Phys.
7.J. L. Lebowitz and R. J. Rubin, Phys. Rev. 131, 2381 (1963).
Article metrics loading...
Full text loading...