ESF Network for Philosophical and Foundational Problems of Modern Physics

Audience

The conference will be the first major gathering organized by the recently established European Science Foundation Network for Philosophical and Foundational Problems of Modern Physics. The aims of this Network are to bring together European researchers from relevant disciplines (e.g., in this case: physicists and mathematicians working in statistical physics and philosophers of physics) and to contribute to the training of young researchers in these fields. The Network will serve as a platform for European research groups and individual researchers in order to learn from and stimulate each other’s work and initiate joint projects.

Participation

The conference will be held in a semi-open format: interested researchers (especially those from Europe) are invited to apply---.talks will be delivered by invitation only.

A session of poster presentations non-invited contributions may be organised when there is sufficient interest. In order to stimulate interaction and fruitful discussion the number of participants is limited to a maximum of 50. This means there is room for 29 non-invited participants.

Application

Those interested in participating are requested to apply at the website, and to indicate if they wish to contribute a poster presentation. There will be no fee.

Support

The main sponsor of the conference is the European Science Foundation. Additional support is provided by the E.W Beth Foundation and the Foundation Physica.

By this support we expect to be able to cover the travel expenses (economy class), accommodation and lunches for invited speakers and the costs of accommodation and lunches for other participants from ESF-member states. However, participants who are able to get reimbursements from their home institutions are strongly encouraged to do so.

An informal welcome reception (Thursday) and conference dinner (Saturday) will be offered to all participants.

Proceedings

The intention is to publish papers presented at the conference, after the usual refereeing procedure, as a special issue of the Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics.

Satellite event

On Friday evening, Professor Jean Bricmont will deliver the ninth EW Beth Lecture,

entitled Determinism, Chaos and Quantum Mechanics in the Aula of the Academy Building. This lecture is organized by the Evert Willem Beth Foundation

(http://www.knaw.nl/beth/home.html). Previous EW Beth Lectures were delivered by P. Lorenzen, P. Aczel, B. van Fraassen M. Finocchiaro, P. Suppes, S. Feferman
E. Agazzi and H. Kamp.

Timetable (subject to change)

Thursday 27

18.00 Informal get-together, Mitland Hotel.

Friday 28

9.00	Coffee and registration
9.30	Jos Uffink	Introduction
10.15	Jakob Yngvason	Second thoughts on the Second Law of classical thermodynamics
11.00	break
11.30	Janneke van Lith	Idealization, approximation and the relationship between thermodynamics and statistical mechanics
12.15	Bob Batterman	Phase Transitions and Breaking Drops: Infinite Idealizations in Physics
13.00	Lunch
14.30	Malcolm Forster	Is Maxwell's Rule Right?
15.15	David Lavis	Is Equilibrium a Useful Concept in Statistical Mechanics?
16.00	break
16.30-17.15	Roman Frigg	In what sense is the Kolmogorov-Sinai entropy a measure for chaotic behaviour? – Bridging the gap between dynamical systems theory and communication theory

19.30	Jean Bricmont	Determinism, Chaos and Quantum Mechanics (E.W.Beth Lecture)

Saturday 29

9.30	Gerard ‘t Hooft	Black Holes: a triple point between general relativity, quantum mechanics and thermodynamics
10.15	Rafael Sorkin	Ten theses on black hole entropy
11.00	break
11.30	Vlatko Vedral	Thermodynamical entropy and quantum entanglement
12.15	Michal Horodecki	Thermodynamical analogies in entanglement theory
13.00	lunch
14.30	Henk van Beijeren	How important is chaos for decay to equilibrium?
15.15	Jean Bricmont	Uses and misuses of ergodicity
16.00-1800	Poster session

19.30	Conference dinner

Sunday 30

9.30	Michel Ghins	Popper versus Grünbaum and Boltzmann on the arrow of time
10.15	Gérard Emch	Probabilistic issues in statistical mechanics
11.00	break
11.30	Giovanni Gallavotti	Thermostats, heat, entropy and nonequilibrium thermodynamics
12.15	Roger Balian	Information in statistical physics
13.00	lunch
14.30	Chris Fuchs	Quantum information does not exist
15.15	David Wallace	Quantum implications for statistical foundations
16.00	break
16.30	Barbara Piechocinska	Could Maxwell's Demons be exorcised indefinitely?
17.15	Owen Maroney	The (absence of a) relationship between logical and thermodynamic reversibility

although all time slots in the table above allow 45 minutes, talks are supposed to take 30 minutes, to allow for 15 minutes of discussion time.

Venue

The conference will take place in the Academy Building of Utrecht University,

located in the middle of the historic city center at the Domplein under the shadow of the Dom tower.

The informal get-together on Thursday evening will take place in the lobby of the Mitland hotel.

The conference dinner on Saturday is at Restaurant Djakarta ( Lucasbolwerk 19).

Accommodation

Participants will be accommodated in the Mitland Hotel on the outskirts of Utrecht (http://www.mitland.nl/).

A block reservation for a number of rooms has been arranged for the period 27 November – 1 December. Invited speakers and participant from ESF-member states are requested to provide the organisers with their dates of arrival and departure, as well as there preference for a single or double room. Other participants are requested to book their rooms directly with the hotel.

Programme

Roger Balian Information in statistical physics

We review the information theory approach to quantum statistical physics, both at equilibrium and off equilibrium. The maximum entropy criterion is shown to be equivalent to a direct approach to Gibbsian density operators, based on the identification of expectation values with averages over a large ensemble. We show how the irreversibility paradox is solved by means of the introduction of different relevant entropies corresponding to different amounts of information.

Bob Batterman Phase Transitions and Breaking Drops: Infinite Idealizations in

Physics

Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics are related to one another

through the so-called ``thermodynamic limit'' in which, roughly speaking the number of particles becomes infinite. At phase transitions and critical points (places of physical discontinuity) this limit fails to be regular. As a result, the ``reduction'' of Thermodynamics to Statistical Mechanics fails to hold at critical phases. This fact is key to understanding an argument due to Craig Callender to the effect that the thermodynamic limit leads to mistakes in Statistical Mechanics. I discuss this argument and argue that the conclusion is misguided. In addition, I discuss an analogous example where a genuine physical discontinuity---the breaking of drops---requires the use of infinite idealizations.

Henk van Beijeren How important is chaos for decay to equilibrium?

At first sight one might expect that classical statistical mechanical systems exhibiting macroscopically irreversible decay to equilibrium ought to show chaotic behavior in phase space. However, one may easily find examples of non-chaotic model systems exhibiting regular hydrodynamic decay to equilibrium. It is not hard either to construct examples of chaotic systems that do not decay to an equilibrium state characterizable by a few macroscopic parameters such as temperature and pressure.

On the basis of this one may conclude first of all that ergodicity on an energy shell (or a properly chosen subset of this) is essential, and it is not guaranteed by the system being chaotic. Furthermore the separation of nearby trajectories in phase space need not increase exponentially with time; power-law increase may suffice for the approach to equilibrium. It may be useful to introduce a concept of weak chaos for characterizing this.

Literature:

H. van Beijeren, nlin.CD/0304056

C. P. Dettmann, E.G.D. Cohen and H. van Beijeren, Nature 401 (1999) 875.

C. P. Dettmann and E.G.D. Cohen, J. Stat. Phys. 103 (2001) 589.

Jean Bricmont Uses and misuses of ergodicity

It is sometimes thought that the problem of approach to equilibrium is related to the problem of proving that certain dynamical systems are ergodic (or mixing). I will explain why ergodicity or mixing are neither necessary nor sufficient in order to account for the approach to equilibrium. I will try to sketch what kind of dynamical properties may nevertheless be important in studying that approach.

Gérard Emch Probabilistic issues in statistical mechanics

Beyond the syntax of Statistical Mechanics, I propose to focus on those of its semantic aspects that depend on the foundations of Probability Theory. Specifically, I intend to address three of these semantic problems and to review some of the solutions that have been offered for them. The first problem is to confront the neglect in which practitioners keep the logical precautions – specifically the recursive function artillery- required by a strict adherence to the limiting relative frequencies approach of Von Mises.

A second problem is to reconcile de Finetti’s professed finitism –and Boltzmann’s- with de Finetti’s so-called subjective approach and the implementations of the conditions under which his celebrated exchangeability theorem holds.

The third problem –or collection of problems- to be mediated is the passage from Clausius’ thermodynamical entropy to Shannon’s information, or the justification for the use of maximum principles to derive canonical equilibrium distributions.

Each of these problems has classical and quantum versions. Is any such distinction fundamental, or merely convenient, or ultimately specious?

Malcolm Forster Is Maxwell's Rule right?

Maxwell's rule determines the specific volumes (or densities) and pressures of a liquid and a gas that co-exist in a liquid-to-gas phase transition. This is a difficult problem to treat in statistical mechanics because it can only occur in a non-ideal fluid with a potential energy

function that includes inter-molecular interactions. I examine a very simple model of this kind, and derive Maxwell's rule as an approximation from first principles, without using the partition function formalism. At the same time, I show that Maxwell's rule yields a classical description of critical phenomena, which is experimentally incorrect. Therefore Maxwell's

rule is wrong. The question is: Does the model point the way to a better understanding of critical exponents?

Roman Frigg In what sense is the Kolmogorov-Sinai entropy a measure for chaotic behaviour? – Bridging the gap between dynamical systems theory and communication theory

On an influential account, chaos is explained in terms of random behaviour; and random behaviour in turn is explained in terms of having positive Kolmogorov-Sinai entropy (KSE). Though intuitively plausible, the association of the KSE with random behaviour needs justification since the definition of the KSE does not make reference to any notion that is connected to randomness. I provide this justification far the case of Hamiltonian systems by proving that the KSE is equivalent to a generalized version of Shannon’s communication-theoretic entropy under certain plausible assumptions. I then discuss consequences of this equivalence for randomness in chaotic dynamical systems.

Chris Fuchs Quantum information does not exist

It is information *carriers* that exist---conceptually both classical and quantum. To confuse the epistemic category (the information) with the ontic (the carriers) is to cause any amount of

trouble. Nonetheless, one thing is true when it comes to applications of information theory to classical and quantum phenomena: There is a difference. And, in that difference---this talk will argue---lies quantum theory's most direct statement about properties of the world by

itself (i.e., the world without the information processing agent).

Giovanni Gallavotti: Thermostats, heat, entropy and nonequilibrium thermodynamics

Stationary states in systems in which dissipation occurs are a natural extension of the equilibrium states of classical thermodynamics. Is it possible to find relations between properties of such states which are universal, ie system independent like the relation linking U,p,V,T in the second law? The first question is perhaps whether an entropy function of the stationary states can be defined. I discuss the question essentially concluding that this might simply be impossible. If one tries to extend thermodynamics beyond equilibrium states to stationary states then entropy become a quantity that can be transferred but it does not make sense to define its value: transformations between equilibrium states play the role for entropy that isochoric transformations play for heat; the entropy in nonequilibrium thermodynamics may play the role of the caloric in equilibrium thermodynamics.

Michel Ghins Popper versus Grünbaum and Boltzmann on the arrow of time

Popper claims that only non-thermodynamic and non-statistical ("classical") processes can provide a satisfactory basis for a factual arrow of time. It is argued that Popper's proposal does not represent a significant improvement on Reichenbach's and Grünbaum's thermodynamic treatments of the asymmetry of time. It is then shown that the proposed elimination of Popper's spontaneity condition by Hill and Grünbaum does not represent a decisive advantage. Finally, it is argued pace Popper that the thesis of the mind-dependence of becoming defended by Boltzmann and Grünbaum is perfectly compatible with a realistic conception of time.

Michal Horodecki Thermodynamical analogies in entanglement theory

We present a thermodynamical analogy in entanglement theory, where mixed state entanglement is related to heat, and distillation of entanglement to drawing work by a heat engine. The monotonicity of relative entropy in thermodynamics implies the second law that is the only basic limitation for efficiency of heat engine. We argue that in any reversible theory this monotonicity is the only limitation for the asymptotic conversion rate from one state to another. There is a question of whether the monotonicity of relative entropy is the only limitation for efficiency of distillation of entanglement. We suggest that this is not the case by providing evidence (not a proof) that bipartite entanglement theory is not a reversible one.

Gerard ‘t Hooft Black Holes: a triple point between General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics and Thermodynamics

At the horizon of a black hole, what is quantum mechanics for the ingoing observer is thermodynamics for the onlooker outside. After an introduction to explain the underlying mathematics, we attempt to draw conclusions from this peculiar feature concerning the nature of space and time and the statistical aspects of the known laws of physics.

David Lavis Is Equilibrium a Useful Concept in Statistical Mechanics?

There are three levels of description in classical statistical mechanics, the microscopic/dynamic, the macroscopic/statistical and the thermodynamic. At one end there is a well-used concept of equilibrium in thermodynamics and at the other dynamic equilibrium does not exist in measure-preserving reversible dynamic systems. Statistical mechanics attempts to situate equilibrium at the macroscopic/statistical level. We explore the extent to which this is either a necessary or useful approach.

Owen Maroney The (absence of a) relationship between logical and thermodynamic reversibility

Landauer erasure seems to provide a powerful link between thermodynamics and information processing (logical computation). The only logical operations which require a dissipation of energy are logically irreversible ones, with the minimum dissipation being kTln2 per bit of information lost. Nevertheless, it can be shown that logical reversibility neither implies nor is implied by thermodynamic reversibility. By examining thermodynamically reversible operations which are logically irreversible, it is argued that information and entropy, while having the same mathematical form, have significant conceptual differences.

Barbara Piechocinska Could Maxwell's Demons be Exorcised Indefinitely?

Maxwell's demons are imaginary beings that extract work by violating the second law of thermodynamics and systematically decreasing entropy. Landauer's principle, which has proven to be a powerful tool in their exorcisms, will be discussed. However, in order to discuss the possibility of indefinite elimination of all demons it would be helpful to have an understanding of the underpinning of the second law. An example of a possible underpinning based on wholeness is presented and discussed. It is shown mathematically and conceptually where the origin of entropy increase may lie if wholeness is accepted.

Rafael Sorkin Ten theses on Black Hole Entropy

The area law for black hole entropy makes sense if the entropy resides on the horizon (with about one bit of information per unit area). What these bits of information really represent depends on the deep structure of spacetime. The two main tasks, then, are: to identify (and count) the ``bits'' and to explain why the total entropy increases. I will maintain that the finiteness of the entropy teaches us that a discrete structure such as a causal set underlies spacetime and the teleological character of the horizon implies that quantum gravity requires a spacetime formulation (as opposed to a Hamiltonian or ``canonical'' one).

Janneke van Lith Idealization, approximation and the relationship between thermodynamics and statistical mechanics

Rather than as theory reduction, I propose that the relationship between thermodynamics (TD) and statistical mechanics (SM) be viewed as comprising the following two parts. First, SM needs to reproduce the empirical successes of TD. This doesn't call for theory reduction, since a suitable approximation of thermodynamical results suffices. Secondly, SM needs to improve on TD, e.g. by increasing explanatory power, empirical success and scope. Such requirements place constraints on the kinds of approximation and idealization involved in SM. In this talk I will discuss theories of approximation and idealization and their role in intertheoretic relationships. As an illustration I will discuss the notion of quasistatic processes within SM, and argue that the standard account is capable of reproducing thermodynamic results, but that it is based on an unacceptable kind of idealization.

Vlatko Vedral Thermodynamical entropy and quantum entanglement

In my talk I will explain the way we currently understand and quantify entanglement using entropic quantities. I will argue that it is not an accident that entropies feature both in quantum entanglement quantification as well as thermodynamics. I will talk about the similarities and differences between the formal structures of local manipulations of entanglement in quantum mechanics and adiabatic state transformations in thermodynamics. The two can be shown to be formally identical when we speak about pure bi-partite states in quantum mechanics. In this case the law that “entanglement cannot increase by local means” in quantum mechanics is analogous to the Second Law of thermodynamics stating that “adiabatic manipulations cannot decrease entropy”. And the same entropy features in ordering states in both cases. However, the structure of thermodynamics does not seem to be rich enough to capture local manipulations of quantum mixed bipartite states or more complicated multipartite states. I will discuss one axiom in particular that is usually assumed to hold in thermodynamics, but fails in quantum mechanics in general. I plan to demonstrate how this axiom, which tells us about the mutual accessibility of states, is violated by mixed entangled states and this will lead me to conclude that there can be no unique measure of entanglement based just on local manipulations. Uniqueness may be recovered at the price of extending the rules of entanglement manipulations, but the mismatch between the two theories may also be telling us something else.

David Wallace Quantum implications for statistical foundations

The general consensus in the foundations of statistical mechanics is that the debate should be carried out in the conceptually simpler realm of classical physics. I argue that this may be unwise, at least in some contexts: classical physics needs to be understood as an approximation to quantum mechanics rather than as a theory in its own right if we are to use it to learn about our quantum world, and the details of that approximation may have significant implications for statistical mechanics.

Jakob Yngvason Second thoughts about the second law of classical thermodynamics

The essence of the second law of classical thermodynamics is the ‘entropy principle’ which asserts the existence of an additive and extensive entropy function, S, that is defined for all equilibrium states of a thermodynamic system and whose increase characterizes the possible state changes under adiabatic conditions. It is one of the few really fundamental physical laws and its consequences are far reaching. It is independent of models, statistical mechanical or otherwise, and can be understood without recourse to Carnot cycles, ideal gases and other assumptions about such things as ‘heat’, ‘temperature’, ‘reversible processes’, etc. If the entropy principle is ever to be derived from statistical mechanics it is important to be clear about what it is that one wants to derive. Hence the second law merits an analysis in its own right and a rigorous approach to the basic principles behind it, due to E.H. Lieb and J. Yngvason, will be discussed in the lecture.

Poster contributions

Michele Campisi

Bridging the gap between dynamics and thermodynamics: Helmholtz' theory and generalization

Sara Franceschelli

Making sense of turbulent transition: the role of simulation.

Richard Gill

Bell's fifth position and the coincidence loophole.

Amit Hagar

How Many Particles (Does It Take to Make a Thermodynamic System)?

EW BETH Lecture

Jean Bricmont

DETERMINISM, CHAOS AND QUANTUM MECHANICS.

Abstract:

After some general remarks on the notion of "determinism", I will discuss the precise meaning of chaos theory and the frequent misunderstandings concerning the implications of that theory. After reviewing the status of probabilistic reasoning in classical physics, I will also briefly discuss misunderstandings occurring in the context of quantum mechanics.

Alexander Afriat Università di Urbino a.afriat-alumni@lse.ac.uk

David Atkinson Rijksuniversiteit Groningen atkinson@phys.rug.nl

Roger Balian Saclay, Paris balian@spht.saclay.cea.fr

Bob Batterman Ohio State University batterman.1@osu.edu

Henk van Beijeren Universiteit Utrecht H.vanBeijeren@phys.uu.nl

Robert Bishop Universität Konstanz R.C.Bishop@lse.ac.uk

Jean Bricmont Université Catholique de Louvain bricmont@fyma.fyma.ucl.ac.be

Harvey Brown University of Oxford harvey.brown@philosophy.oxford.ac.uk

Michele Campisi Univeristy of Pisa mc0112@unt.edu

Elena Castellani Università di Firenze elena.castellani@unifi.it

Dennis Dieks Universiteit Utrecht dieks@phys.uu.nl

Bram Edens CPB, Den Haag bramedens@yahoo.com

Gérard Emch University of Florida (Gainsville) gge@math.ufl.edu

Malcolm Forster University of Wisconsin (Madison) mforster@wisc.edu

Sara Franceschelli ENS-LSH, Lyon & frances@paris7.jussieu.fr

RESHEIS, CNRS &

Université Paris7

Roman Frigg LSE London R.P.Frigg@lse.ac.uk

Chris Fuchs Dublin Institute of Technology cafuchs@research.bell-labs.com

Giovanni Gallavotti Università di Roma1 Giovanni.Gallavotti@roma1.infn.it

Michel Ghins Université Catholique de Louvain ghins@lofs.ucl.ac.be

Victor Gijsbers Universiteit Utrecht v.a.gijsbers@phys.uu.nl

Richard Gill UniversiteitUtrecht gill@math.uu.nl

Amit Hagar Università di Bologna ahagar@interchange.ubc.ca

Julian Hartley Imperial College London julian.hartley1@ic.ac.uk

Stephan Hartmann LSE London S.Hartmann@lse.ac.uk

Meir Hemmo University of Haifa meir@research.haifa.ac.il

Leah Henderson MIT, Boston lhenders@mit.edu

Gerard ‘t Hooft Universiteit Utrecht thooft@phys.uu.nl

Michal Horodecki University of Gdańsk fizmh@univ.gda.pl

Nico van Kampen Universiteit Utrecht N.G.vanKampen@phys.uu.nl

Peter Kirschenmann Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam peterp@nat.vu.nl

Fred Kronz University of Texas, Austin kronz@mail.utexas.edu

David Lavis King’s College London) david.lavis@kcl.ac.uk

Janneke van Lith Universiteit Utrecht Janneke.vanLith@phil.uu.nl

Andrea Lubberdink Universiteit Utrecht lubberdink@phys.uu.nl

Holger Lyre Universität Bonn lyre@uni-bonn.de

Owen Maroney University of Bristol o.maroney@bristol.ac.uk

Fred Muller Universiteit Utrecht f.a.muller@phys.uu.nl

Remko Muis Universiteit Utrecht r.muis@phys.uu.nl

Willem de Muynck Technische Universiteit Eindhoven W.M.d.Muynck@tue.nl

Barbara Piechocinska Uppsala Universitet Barbara.Piechocinska@angstrom.uu.se

Miklós Rédei Loránd Eötvös University, Budapest redei@hps.elte.hu

Michiel Seevinck Universiteit Utrecht m.p.seevinck@phys.uu.nl

Rafael Sorkin Syracuse University (Syracuse NY) sorkin@phy.syr.edu

László Szabó Loránd Eötvös University, Budapest leszabo@philosophy.elte.hu

Chris Timpson University of Oxford christopher.timpson@queens.oxford.ac.uk

Jos Uffink Universiteit Utrecht uffink@phys.uu.nl

Vlatko Vedral Imperial College London v.vedral@imperial.ac.uk

David Wallace University of Oxford david.wallace@magdalen.oxford.ac.uk

Jakob Yngvason Universität Wien Jakob.Yngvason@ap.univie.ac.at

Henrik Zinkernagel Universidad de Granada zink@ugr.es

Practical information

Venue site: Belle van Zuylen Hall, Academiegebouw, Domplein 29.

EW Beth Lecture: Aula, Academiegebouw, Domplein 29.

Conference dinner: Restaurant Djakarta, Lucasbolwerk 19.

Accomodation: Hotel Mitland, Ariënslaan 1, 3573 PT Utrecht.

TEL +31 (0)30-2715824; FAX +31 (0)30-2719003, info@mitland.nl, www.mitland.nl

Utrecht Central Station (), the Academiegebouw, and the Lucasbolwerk can all be found on the maps below.

FROM AMSTERDAM SCHIPHOL AIRPORT TO UTRECHT

- Take an Intercity train from Schiphol with destination Amersfoort or Hilversum.
Departure times: 10, 23, 40 and 53 minutes past every hour.
- Change at Duivendrecht to board an Intercity to Utrecht Central station.

- Travel time (including change): 36-38 minutes. Price: 6.50 euro (one way, 2^nd class).

- N.B.: There are also direct trains leaving from Schiphol to Utrecht. These are slow trains that take 1 hour to arrive at Utrecht Central Station.

FROM UTRECHT CENTRAL STATION TO THE ACADEMIEGEBOUW

The Academiegebouw is within 10 minutes walking distance from the station. Alternatively, you can take bus line 2 and get off at bus-stop Domplein.

FROM UTRECHT CENTRAL STATION TO HOTEL MITLAND

Bus transportation

You can buy single-trip bus tickets (1.60 euro) from the driver. However, since you will probably need the bus more several times, it is advisable to buy a strippenkaart (6.20 euro) which will allow 7 rides. This strippenkaart is for sale in the GVU booth at the bus platform (open till 19.00 pm working days) or at the ticket-windows in the Central Station Hall.

By bus from Utrecht CS:

- Bus number 4 direction: F. Andrealaan or:
- Bus number 11 direction: De Uithof / AZU
Departure time: every 10 minutes between 07:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m.
- leave the bus at bus-stop Oorsprongpark
- Cross the railway crossing
- Take the first street to the left (Buys Ballotstraat), along the railway
- Turn right at the end (Cornelis Houtmanstraat)
- Straight on under the fly-over (Ariënslaan)
- Hotel Mitland is on the right after 50 meters

By car: Hotel Mitland is easy to reach from the motorways surrounding the cities (cf. the map below) and has sufficient parking space. It is not advisably to attempt to take a car into town: the pattern of one-way streets is designed so as to prevent any cars from reaching their destination. And even if you do succeed you are not likely to find parking space.

FROM HOTEL MITLAND TO THE ACADEMIEGEBOUW

- Go back to the bus-stop Oorsprongpark.

-Take bus 4 or 11 and get off at the bus-stop Janskerkhof

- 2 minutes walk to the Acedemiegebouw (see map above).

FROM UTRECHT CS TO AMSTERDAM SCHIPHOL AIRPORT

- Take an Intercity train in the direction of Amsterdam Central Station

(destination: Haarlem or Den Helder).

-Departure times: 2, 16, 32 and 46 minutes past each hour.

- Change at Duivendrecht for a train towards Schiphol.

- Total travel time: 36-38 minutes.

The European Science Foundation Network for Philosophical and Foundational Problems of Modern Physics

ESF Conference on Philosophical and Foundational Issues in Statistical Physics, Utrecht, 28-30 November 2003

Audience

Participation

Satellite event

Timetable (subject to change)