The microscopic explanation of the physical phenomena represented by a macroscopic theory is often cast in terms of the reduction of the latter to a more fundamental theory, which represents the same phenomena at the microscopic level, albeit in an idealized way. In particular, the reduction of thermodynamics to statistical mechanics is a much discussed case-study in philosophy of physics. Based on the Generalized Nagel–Schaffner model, the alleged reductive explanation would be accomplished if one finds a corrected version of classical thermodynamics that can be strictly derived from statistical mechanics. That is the sense in which, according to Callender (1999, 2001), one should not take thermodynamics too seriously. Arguably, the sought-after revision is given by statistical thermodynamics, intended as a macroscopic theory equipped with a probabilistic law of equilibrium fluctuations. The present paper aims to evaluate this proposal. The upshot is that, while statistical thermodynamics enables one to re-define equilibrium so as to agree with Boltzmann entropy, it does not provide a definitive solution to the problem of explaining macroscopic irreversibility from a microscopic point of view.

以宏观理论为代表的物理现象的微观解释通常被认为是将后者简化为更基本的理论，该理论在微观层面上代表相同的现象，尽管是以理想化的方式。特别是，将热力学简化为统计力学是物理学哲学中一个备受讨论的案例研究。基于广义 Nagel-Schaffner 模型，如果人们找到可以严格从统计力学推导出来的经典热力学的修正版本，那么所谓的还原解释就可以完成。这就是根据 Callender (1999, 2001) 的说法，人们不应该把热力学看得太严肃。可以说，受追捧的修订是由统计热力学给出的，旨在作为一种宏观理论，配备平衡波动的概率定律。本文旨在评估这一提议。结果是，虽然统计热力学使人们能够重新定义平衡以与玻尔兹曼熵一致，但它并没有为从微观角度解释宏观不可逆性的问题提供明确的解决方案。