arXiv:1906.10069v2 [cond-mat.stat-mech] 8 May 2020 intermadrltdtopics. related and theorem tion Abstract VI.Smltoso 2D-NS on Simulations XVIII. eern loafwo t nepeain,consequences interpretations, its view conjectures. of of related point few original and a the the present also see from I works, referring Here subsequent far in [2]. very and instance [1] often for in is proposed one interpretation original its but (FR): 1 VI icu lisadReversibility and Fluids Viscous XVII. II reesblt iescale time Irreversibility XIII. pa Lyapunov size. set attracting Dissipation: Strong VIII. I.Cas tutr fAoo ytm.Terdgtlcode digital Their systems. Anosov of Structure Chaos. XIV. I.Ohrrltos Comments. relations. Other XIX. it to Approach & Stationarity ? Entropy XVI. I.FutainPatterns Fluctuation XII. equivalence Ensembles ensembles. Nonequilibrium VII. V ouea tcatcpoes R sIigsi chain spin Ising as SRB process. stochastic as Volume XV. aywrsivsiaeteFutainRelation, Fluctuation the investigate works Many I.Smere,(iereversal) (time Symmetries, III. I nae’ Reciprocity Onsager’s XI. FR. & Reversal Time Dissipation. IX. (FR) Relation Fluctuation VI. dissipation reversible Example: IV. I ttoayDsrbtos(SRB) Distributions Stationary II. .Anl-ue geodesics Arnold-Euler D. .FutainDsiainTheorem Dissipation Fluctuation X. dissipation? Hamiltonian V. .Aotcrancmet nCH on comments certain About A. .Rvril heating Reversible C. .LclFutain.A example. An Fluctuations. Local B. .Introduction I. References Wishes D. equilibrium .Tasetfutaintheorem fluctuation Transient A. .Rel-ibbounds Ruelle-Lieb C. .TeJrisyrelation Jarzinsky The B. hsrve sddctdt olLbwt to work. guidance Lebowitz my constant indelibly Joel influenced his which for teaching to and gratitude dedicated my is witness review This : lcuto Relation Fluctuation eiwo h utainrlto,fluctua- relation, fluctuation the on review A oeulbimand Nonequilibrium .INTRODUCTION I. ivniGallavotti Giovanni a 1 2020 11, May Contents irs. s. 15 14 13 12 10 16 32 31 30 28 28 27 27 26 25 25 23 21 20 18 7 6 5 4 3 3 1 9 2 1 al ytm xiiigcatcmtoscnb treated be can as purposes motions many for chaotic exhibiting systems “all” hproi xdpit) hl twnesivdn an invading wanders it surface while attracting point”), fixed “hyperbolic ytm nosre omvn,i hs space phase point in a co-moving, observer an systems n os 9 0,1,C.] sbifl ealdi h foot- the in recalled briefly is note. Ch.4], 10],[11, [9, flows, and ohss(called pothesis nonequilib- in below. as see well systems: as the rium equilibrium of in distributions states probability stationary the of determination the ue a es ail)adi,teeoe a therefore, is, and tacitly) ture least (at sumed ρ oegnrl.Ti sa supinwihsol not should which it assumption an overlooked: is be This general). more of sapoaiiydsrbto nte“hs space” which sity it “phase here) that the manifold assumption Riemannian on smooth fundamental distribution the probability a to is subject is it Yet t itiuin endb h rtcland protocol the by defined distribution: ity protocol. the fixes one a carefully how called matter sometimes is that tocol procedure, defined well siltr,atog oeie hyaecniee an considered harmonic are notion. the mathematical they by abstract systems sometimes chaotic although non oscillators, for played that to to assumptions, tems suitable further under plies, the systems, ones, early the de- with (pertinent) starting [3–7]. many followed, the present that cannot velopments I as discussed, em ob nashtcqeto” 8 p.221]. [8, question”, aesthetic understanding If an to hindrance be a to or seems aid an are systems Anosov cal e.g. ihteinverse the with etplanes gent and a teeypoint every at (a) if map Anosov that h ento fAoo o ssmlr h oain mutu- covariant the similar: is flow Anosov of definition The ∂S otnol on continuosly b utemr hr are there furthermore (b) Cλ c hr sapitwoeobti es in dense is orbit whose point a is there (c) v ( ∈ x h oncinwt hsc setbihdvatehy- the via established is Physics with connection The hrfr nta aaaegnrtdwt probabil- a with generated are data initial Therefore a by generated are data initial observations natural In h Raie rmasml hoe ndynamical on theorem simple a from arises FR The are theory the of foundations the only review this In M x ( n ) x T Wehro o pcltoscnenn uhhypotheti- such concerning speculations not or “Whether ihtefrrahn osqec hti ed to leads it that consequence reaching far the with , | S dx ihrsett h oueof volume the to respect with u r lasaetdb nvial ros no errors, unavoidable by affected always are but , ∂S hc a ecniee spaigarl analogous role a playing as considered be can which : v ∈ ) u 2 ± sasot ( smooth a is | ( > n , sa netbesot ( smooth invertible an is 1 x M ( where x ), x cso h ln agn oteatatn e so set attracting the to tangent plane the on acts ) ± en naoe set open a in being esi sa“adepit mteaial a (mathematically point” “saddle a as it sees T if 0 1 T s ( γ lcuto Theorem Fluctuation x ρ x ( r oain ntesneta h Jacobian the that sense the in covariant are , v x and ) S ssm otnosfnto o slightly (or function continuous some is hoi Hypothesis Chaotic = ) ∈ x − antb proved be cannot A i.e. 1 T ∈ a on map ) s T ( nsvsystems Anosov in M T γ x u ∞ ( and ) S > C ( M hr r w opeetr tan- complementary two are there x dffrnibe one manifold bounded -differentiable) ( x ,tases in transverse ), h oino nsvmaps Anosov of notion The , ) ± 0 | 1 < λ , ∂S i.e. M ) dx 1 γ , h ytm( system the , − ∞ n around = uhthat such 1 ( F) h Tap- FT The (FT). , dffrnibetogether -differentiable x C) ttn that stating (CH)) , M ,s u, u ti lasas- always is it but ) nomly nsuch in Informally, . v h probability The . | , Cλ < M x x hc depend which , . disaden- a admits a h form the has nsvsys- Anosov n | ,S M, ∂S a fna- of law | v unknown | M > n , n ( san is ) x with , M ) pro- v if 0 | (a < 1 . 2

Suppose that evolution ( -smooth, for simplicity) of a defined on a manifold M containing a globally attracting mechanical system is defined∞ by a map S on a phase space smooth surface on which the motion is an Anosov map M and is attracted by an -smooth surface M on or flow. Then allA initial data x, aside from a set of zero which S is an Anosov map∞S , as consideredA ⊂ here volume, evolve visiting open sets D with a time frequency in most cases (for simplicity).A←→A It transforms an initial µ(D): the probability distribution µ is independent on the datum x into the new datum Sx in a single time step; protocol generating x. The probability µ is ergodic and then the main property of the dynamical system (M,S) mixing at exponential rate for all smooth observables. is that the evolution is chaotic and a phase space point, Phase space M can be a smooth manifold or, more with exceptions forming a set of zero volume, moves ac- n cumulating at the attracting surface densely.3 Such S generally, an open set in R for some n, which is a do- will be called a map with an AnosovA attractor.4 main of attraction of M. For systems with a global Anosov attractor (flowsA⊂ or maps) the associated unique The key property of maps with an Anosov attractor is stationary probability distribution µ(dx) that defines the that the fraction of time asymptotically spent in any open statistical properties of the evolution, (i.e. frequencies of (or just measurable and with > 0 volume) phase space visit to regions of M), is called the SRB distribution, region dx, defines a stationary probability distribution [17–19]. µ(dx) = µ(Sdx) which is independent of the initial x, The just mentioned theorems on maps or flows become again except for data x forming a set of 0 phase space relevant for systems evolving chaotically in the cases in volume, [12, 13]. The probability µ is concentrated on the which the following hypothesis holds i.e., as its name attracting surface , i.e. µ( ) = 1; the data outside the suggests (as intended in [1, 20, 21], see also the warning attracting surface A evolve whileA exponentially attracted in [1, endnote 18]), always when motions are empirically by , [14, 15]. A A chaotic: Likewise if the evolution is instead described by a flow x Stx, generated by a ( -smooth) differential equa- Chaotic hypothesis (CH): A chaotic evolution takes place tion→ on M,x ˙ = f(x), which∞ on M is an Anosov on a phase space M being attracted by a bounded smooth flow and is an attractive smoothA surface, ⊂ then any ini- attracting surface M and on the map S (or the A A ⊂ A tial point x M, with exceptions forming a set of zero flow St) is an Anosov map (or flow). volume, moves∈ accumulating densely at and spending The SRB distribution µ has support on the attract- a well defined fraction of time in everyA measurable re- ing set : so smoothness of is a strong assumption.5 gion of M with positive volume: thus uniquely defining Of courseA there is the possibilityA that is a surface of a stationary probability distribution µ(dx) = µ(S dx), t dimension lower than that of M, as specifiedA in the CH.6 concentrated on , which is independent of the initial x, again except forA data forming a set of 0 volume in phase The CH is a general and heuristic (more restrictive) in- terpretation of original ideas on turbulence phenomena, space M, [12, 13, 16]: such flow St will be called a flow with an Anosov attractor. [22], and has been introduced in [1, 23] to interpret simu- lations on evolutions with attracting set coinciding with Formally: the full phase space, and extended to the more general Theorem: Suppose that a smooth dynamical system is case in which the attracting surface is lower dimensional, [20, 21]). Hereafter the CH will be supposed to hold for all dy- namical systems considered, unless stated otherwise.

ally transversal planes are now three: Tu(x),Ts(x) on which The above formulation in which the Anosov system is expansion and contraction take place under action of the flow realized on a attracting surface = M, rather than on A 6 St as in the map case and a third 1-dimensional tangent plane the full phase space, already hinted in [1], has become parallel to f(x), ifx ˙ = f(x) is the differential equation defin- relevant as soon as attempts were undertaken to apply ing the flow St; this is a tangent vector supposed not zero, f(x) > 0, and which, of course, neither expands nor con- | | tracts under the ∂St(x). The stable and unstable planes of Anosov systems (maps or 5Which contrasts the picture of as a fractal set. In sys- flows) can be integrated (i.e. there is a smooth surface every- 20 A where tangent to them) to define stable and unstable mani- tems of 10 molecules with a fractal attractor of dimen- sion 6 10∼19 + 3.141 this means that it ’behaves’ as a smooth folds Wu(x),Ws(x) which are dense on M. · 19 3 surface of dimension 6 10 ; or in a Navier-Stokes fluid (an - This means that for all times t0 the closure of the trajectory · ∞ t dimensional system) at large Reynolds number R an attract- of S x t>t0 is . 9 4Evolutions{ } definedA by maps arise typically when studying evo- ing set of dimension R 3 + .33 ’behaves’ as a smooth surface 9 lutions in continuous time through observations triggered by of dimension integral part of R 3 . “timing events”, i.e. observations that are made every time 6Often, if the dynamical system depends on a parameter ε, the a specified event takes place: for instance every time that chaotic motion might occupy, asymptotically, an attracting the evolving trajectory crosses a given surface in phase space. set ε with a dimension dependent on ε and equal to that These are referred as observations performed on a Poincar´e’s of theA full phase space only for a small (if any) interval of section. variability of ε.

2 3

CH to systems for which the strict inclusion M was a change of σ(x) into σ(x)+ u(Srx) u(x) for a suit- manifest, [20, 21]. A⊂ able function u(x):7 which implies that− the time av- Besides smoothness of the attracting set the further 1 T j erage limT T j=0 σ(Sr x), if existing, does not de- strong assumption of CH is that the evolution on is pend on the→∞ metric used on M. Likewise and with the A P hyperbolic in the sense of Anosov. Both aspects of the same implication on the averages, in the continuous evo- CH can be simultaneously weakened by supposing that lution systems, σ(x) changes into σ(x) +u ˙(x) (where the motion has an attractor which satisfies the “Axiom def 8 u˙(x) = j ∂xj U(x) f(x)j for a suitable function U(x)). A”, [16]; however such generality will not be envisaged n The timeP average σ+ of σ i.e. of n σ(S x) or t here. → → It will be convenient to distinguish between attrac- σ(Stx) coincides, except for a set of x’s with 0 volume, tor and attracting set : the latter is an invariant with the average σ+ = σ(x)µ(dx) with respect to the set approached asymptoticallyA by all points x in its SRB distribution µ. R basin of attraction (which is an open set around ): Remark that σ+ is a quantity which has the dimension A of an inverse time in the case of continuous systems while limt distance(Stx, ) = 0; while an attractor A is an→∞ invariant subsetA dense on which has full SRB⊂ A it is dimensionless for maps, (as time is an integer in measure (i.e. µ(A) = 1) and minimalA Hausdorff dimen- the case of maps). It will play an important role in the following, particularly when σ+ = 0, as it sets a time sion, often smaller than the dimension of which, in 9 6 turn, could be much smaller than the dimensionA of M. scale that will be called the dissipation time scale. The SRB distributions have strong ergodic properties (see Sec.XIV for some details) and in particular the av- III. SYMMETRIES, (TIME REVERSAL) erage value over time of a smooth observable O(x) is reached exponentially fast: however, more generally, it is possible that in M there are several attracting sets i, Trying to evince information from the statistical prop- each with its own SRB distribution, just as in equilibriumA erties of the stationary distributions of a time evolution, statistical mechanics there are cases in which the Gibbs discrete or continuous, it is important to take into ac- state is not unique and the extremal ones correspond to count symmetries of the underlying equations of motion, different phases. It will appear that the analogy is a deep [30]. one, see Sec.VII. There are not many such symmetries and a key role is Anosov systems are chaotic systems whose properties played by the fundamental symmetries, like translation can be studied in great detail: certainly they correspond and rotation invariance or time reversal, often enjoyed by to an idealization of chaos; but it should be kept in mind the molecular constituents of the systems of interest and that Statistical Mechanics arose from the idealization, perhaps reflected by their macroscopic properties. far more surprising, that microscopic motion could be Of particular interest will be systems in which the evo- regarded as periodic, [24–27], see also [28, Sec.6&7]. lution is S, discrete in time, or is a continuous time evo- lution St, which satisfies a “time reversal ” symmetry, i.e. such that there is an -smooth map x Ix on the ∞ → II. STATIONARY DISTRIBUTIONS (SRB) phase space M, independent or smoothly dependent on any parameter that might affect the dynamics, with the property Let time evolution on M be a map Sr, (or a flow Sr,t), that may depend on a parameter r (or on more but imag- 1 2 ine, to simplify, that only r will be varied). Then as r (a) IS− = SI, I =1, discrete evol. changes the stationary SRB distribution µr(dx), for the 2 (a′) IS t = StI, I =1, cont. evol. (3.1) system (M,Sr), changes and the collection of such dis- − tributions will be called mc and its elements will be (b) I is isometric thought of as ensembles ofE stationary states. Volumes of regions in phase space M change. in gen- For isolated particle systems I is just the reversal of all eral, when transformed by the discrete evolution map S velocities and it is a basic law of nature in Newtonian or by the flow St generated by a differential equation physics. x˙ = f(x); and the rate of change per unit volume can be A typical situation is described in the following sec- measured from the Jacobian matrix J(x)ij = ∂iS(x)j for tion presenting a simple, but quite general, model of a def nonequilibrium system. maps (here ∂i = ∂xi ) or by the matrix Jij = ∂ifj (x) in the case of a flow. And the phase space contraction rate is defined by:

7 σ(x)= log det J(x) , discrete evolution e.g. a change in variables y = w(x) leads to u(x) = − | | (2.1) log det ∂xj wi . 8− | | σ(x)= divf(x) TrJ(x), continuous evol. e.g. changing x into y = w(x) leads to U(x)= log ∂xj wj . − ≡− 9Since the CH-evolutions that we consider proceed− towards| | a Changing variables or the metric on phase space implies bounded attracting set it is σ+ 0, [29]. ≥

3 4

The model will also illustrate the notion of phase space where the last term αaX˙ a is a phenomenological force contraction and its relation with the thermodynamic no- that implies that thermostats− particles keep constant to- 3 tion of entropy generation. It will appear that although tal kinetic energies Ka = 2 NakB Ta: αa is therefore (as there is a relation between entropy creation rate and checked by direct computation of the time derivative of 1 ˙ 2 phase space contraction, still the two notions are quite Ka = 2 Xa,j defined by different. Nevertheless their difference can be expressed ˙ as a variation of a suitable phase space observable evalu- def La Ua αa = − (4.3) ated at successive map iterations or, in the cases of flows, 3NakBTa as a time derivative of a suitable observable: therefore it where L = ∂ W (X , X ) X˙ is the work done per has no influence, or a controlled one, on the average phase a Xa a 0 a a unit time by− the forces that the· particles in exert on space contraction, [2, Ch2.5]. C0 the particles in a,a > 0; here kB denotes Boltzmann’s constant. C The exact form of the forces that have to be added in IV. EXAMPLE: REVERSIBLE DISSIPATION order to insure the kinetic energies constancy should not really matter, within wide limits. But this is a property The system consists in N N particles in a con- that is not obvious and which is much debated.10 ≡ 0 tainer and of N particles in n containers which play The work La in Eq.(4.3) will be interpreted as heat C0 a Ca the role of thermostats: their positions will be denoted Q˙ a ceded, per unit time, by particles in 0 to the a-th def C Xa, a = 0, 1,...,n, and X = (X0, X1,..., Xn). Interac- thermostat. The entropy production rate due to heat ex- tions will be described by a potential energy changes between the system and the thermostats can, therefore, be naturally defined by

Na n n def Q˙ σ0(X˙ , X) = a (4.4) W (X)= Ua(Xa)+ Wa(X0, Xa) (4.1) k T Xa=1 B a Xa=0 Xa=1 because the “temperature” of a remains constant, and i.e. particles in different thermostats only interact in- at stationarity the thermostatsC can be regarded in ther- directly, via the system. All masses will be m = 1, for mal equilibrium. simplicity. It should be stressed that here no entropy notion is T1 introduced for the stationary state: only variation of the T thermostats entropy is considered and it should not be 2 regarded as a new quantity because, in the stationary C0 states, the thermostats should be considered in equilib- rium at a fixed temperature. T 3 A question is whether there is any relation between σ0 and the phase space contraction σ of Eq.(2.1) for the

Fig.1:The reservoirs occupy finite regions outside 0, e.g. sec- equations of motion in Eq.(4.2) (i.e. minus the divergence 3 C tors a R , a = 1, 2 . . .. Their particles are constrained of the equations Eq.(4.2)). C ⊂ to have a total kinetic energy Ka constant, by suitable forces The latter, in the recent literature, has been identified Fa, so that the reservoirs “temperatures” Ta, are well defined, with the entropy production: and in the present case can Na 1 2def 3 def 3 −1 be immediately computed by the appropriate differentia- by Ka = (X˙ a,j ) = NakB Ta = Naβ . The set-up, j=1 2 2 2 a tion of Eq.(4.2),(4.3) and is (neglecting O(min N 1)) classical andP quantum, is introduced in [31]. a>0 a−

3Na 1 Q˙ a U˙ a Q˙ a σ(X˙ , X)= − − = U˙ (4.5) Particles in 0 may also be subject to external, possibly 3Na kB Ta kB Ta C a>0 a>0 − non conservative, forces F(X0, E) depending on a few P P 3Na 1 Ua strength parameters E = (E1, E2,...). It is convenient where U = − . Hence in this example, a>0 3Na kB Ta to imagine that the forces due to the confining potentials physically interesting,P in which the thermostats are “ex- determining the geometrical shape of the region 0 are ternal” to the system volume (unlike to what happens in included in F, so that one of the parameters is the volumeC V = . See Fig.1. |C0| Following Sec.I the statistical properties of the station- ary states of the system should be described, assuming 10The above thermostatting forces choice can be seen to coin- the CH, by the SRB distributions µE on phase space. cide with the ones obtained via Gauss’ least effort principle The equations of motion are: for ideal anholonomic constraints applied to the constraints Ka = const, see [2, Ch.2]: this is a criterion that has been adopted in several simulations, [32, Sec.5.2,p103]. Indepen- X¨ 0i = ∂iU0(X0) ∂iWa(X0, Xi)+ Fi − − dently of Gauss’ principle it is immediate to check that if αa Xa (4.2) is defined by Eq.(4.3) then the kinetic energies Ka are, strictly, X¨ = ∂ U (X ) ∂ W (X , X ) α X˙ constants of motion. ai − i a a − i a 0 i − a a

4 5

several examples in which they act inside the volume of the particles in a that are far from the boundary of 0, the system), the phase space contraction is not the en- are little affectedC by the interactions with the particlesC in tropy production rate, [2, Ch.2]. However it differs from 0 and the average kinetic energy per particle in each a the entropy production rate by a total time derivative. willC be an exact constant of motion, equal to the initialC 0 3 Consequence: entropy creation rate σ and phase space 2 kBTa, for all finite times (although it is still possible contraction σ differ, but their time averages coincide. that in the limit of infinite time this might change).12 This is relevant because the definition Eq.((4.4)) has Consider as initial distribution µ0(dx) which is a prod- meaning independently of the equations of motions and uct of independent canonical distributions in each con- can, therefore, be suitable for experimental tests, [2, tainer a,a 0, with given densities and temperatures C 1 ≥ 13 Ch.5-2.Ch.3,Ch.4]. ρa,Ta . ≡ kB βa It should be stressed that the numbers Na of particles Although now purely Hamiltonian the system is infinite 3Na 1 in the reservoirs, a> 0, enters through − , hence is is 3Na and the phase space volume measured by the evolving essentially independent on the thermostat sizes (provided distribution µt(dx) = µ0(S tdx), changes per unit time large). by σ(x) with: − Finally I mention that the identification, up to a to- tal time derivative, of phase space contraction with en- n tropy production rate can be shown, as discussed in d µ0(S tdx) σ(x)= log − βaQ˙ a + β0Q˙ 0 (5.1) Sec.VII , XV below, to cover the entropy production rate dt µ0(dx) ≡ in systems whose evolution can be approximated by Xa=1 macroscopic continua equations, like fluids described by where σ(x) is computed from the equations of motion as: Navier-Stokes equations. In the sense that, again, phase space contraction of the interacting particles systems that underlay the macroscopic equations is related, in the Q˙ a =La = ∂X Wa(X0, Xa) X˙ a, a 1 stationary states, to the entropy production rate inde- − a · ≥ (5.2) ˙ ˙ ˙ pendently defined in classical nonequilibrium Thermo- Q0 =K0 + U0 dynamics, [30]: and, at most, it differs from it by a total time derivative, [2, Ch.4]. and β0Q˙ 0 = β0 (K˙ 0 + U˙ 0)= β0 F X˙ 0 (U˙ 0j Q˙ j )) · − j>0 − is a time derivative so that it does notP contribute to the 1 time average σ+ = limT σ(Stx)dt, [2, Ch.4]. →∞ T V. HAMILTONIAN DISSIPATION? R Remark: If µ0 is defined, as proposed above, as a product of independent canonical distributions it might be sur- No entropy production is possible in a stationary state prising that the system in plays a special role: could C0 of a Hamiltonian system (i.e. an isolated system). At one write the same formulae with 1 playing the role of least not if it is finite. However things are different when and find that Q˙ is a total derivativeC of U + K ? C0 1 1 1 the system is in contact with infinite systems. However U1 +K1 is infinite unlike U0+K0, so nothing can As an example consider a Hamiltonian version of the be concluded about its time derivative. If the regions j model of Sec.IV, Fig.1 above. If the constraints on the C were finite then the system would evolve and all U˙ a + K˙ a kinetic energy in the containers a,a = 1,...,n, are re- would uninterestingly average to 0: so 0 plays a special moved and the containers are extendedC to infinity, inter- C role and is the only container for which U0 + K0 and its esting stationary states can be obtained from initial con- time derivative are meaningful. figurations which, in each , are naturally chosen from Ca the canonical equilibrium ensemble with density ρa and The expression Eq.(5.1), and the irrelevance of the con- 11 ˙ temperature Ta and from any distribution for the par- tribution from Q0 to the average of σ (see Eq.(5.2)) is ticles in 0. The initial distribution will be called µ0 and, the key to the interpretation of fluctuations on σ in sys- althoughC not invariant in time, it may evolve towards an tems modeled by particles: even in cases (essentially in invariant one, µ (as reasonable as this looks, however, all experimental settings) in which the evolution is not a mathematical proof of this is far from known). The existence of µ will be assumed in this example. Since the containers are infinite the stationary state that will be reached can be expected to keep an aver- 12The physical picture is that the energy generated by work 3 performed by the active forces on the particles in 0 and by age kinetic energy per particle remaining 2 kBTa, identi- C the interactions between the particles in 0 and those in the cally equal to the initial value. For rather general mod- C els of microscopic interaction between particles, it can be thermostats is ceded to the thermostats creating in them heat shown, see for instance [33], that the time evolution of currents Ja which decrease as the inverse of the square dis- tance to 0: so the thermostats remain asymptotically, as the C distance from 0 tends to , in equilibrium. 13 C ∞ But the choice of T0 has no particular physical meaning and the distribution in 0 could be replaced by “any” distribution, 11 3N0 C With density on the phase space 0 R . with some density on the X0, X˙ 0 variables. C ×

5 6

describable in terms of equations of motion, in the sense distribution µsrb on , i.e. the probability distribution that the equations of motion are not analytically known. generated by the motionA of any point x chosen randomly In such cases the average of σ(x) (equal to that of with some density with respect to the volume, I. 0 ˙ Then consider the stationary µ -probability of the σ (x) = a 1 βaQa) is still accessible via measurement srb of the heatsP exchanged≥ and the temperatures of the reser- above variable p, Eq.(6.1), and define its large deviation voirs with which heat is exchanged. Of course it is a deli- rate as a function ζ(p) such that: cate and difficult task to measure all such quantities, i.e. the full entropy production. τ maxp∈D ζ(p)+o(τ) It is remarkable, and it will be discussed in Sec.VI, that Psrb,τ (D)= e (6.2) quite generally, under the Chaotic Hypothesis, that it for all domains D (i.e. for all regions D which are closures becomes possible to obtain a general, universal, property of their interiors). of the (rare) fluctuations of the entropy production. If the dynamical system is an Anosov system (or, more generally, if is satisfies the “axiom A”) then VI. FLUCTUATION RELATION (FR) (a) the rate ζ(p) exists and is defined in the interior of an interval [p′,p′′] containing p = 1, (b) it is analytic in p if p′ < p′′ while it is for p The Fluctuation Relation deals with the entropy pro- −∞ 6∈ ˙ [p ,p ] duction σ0(x) = Qa , see (5.1),(5.2), or more gen- ′ ′′ a kB Ta (c) σ = 0 if and only if the SRB distribution µ admits erally, with the phase space volume contraction rate + P a density over the attracting surface, [29]. σ(x) = ∂ f (x) and it applies to finite systems − i xi i whose evolutionP takes place on a phase space M, via an A simple universal result for reversible Anosov sys- equationx ˙ = f(x), and is time reversal symmetric in the tems, is the following Fluctuation Theorem, [1],[12, 34]. sense of Sec.III and hyperbolic on M (i.e. it is a Anosov FT: If the evolution is time reversal symmetric then the system).14 It equally deals with evolutions which are rate function15 verifies the symmetry property: time reversible Anosov maps: attention will be mostly concentrated on the continuous time case, to avoid repe- ζ( p)= ζ(p) pσ+ (6.3) titions. − − The σ(x) is defined in terms of the metric on M and via for p [ p∗,p∗] with p∗ 1. appropriate covariant derivatives ∂ : but it is simpler to ∈ − ≥ xi An immediate consequence is that if the Chaotic Hy- imagine that M is a Euclidean space with coordinates pothesis is considered valid, time reversibility holds and measured in prefixed units, so that ∂ are the usual par- xi the attracting set can be supposed to coincide with the tial derivatives. full phase space (so that = M and σ σ), then In general σ(x) depends on the metric and changing the entropy generation rateA or more generallyA ≡ the phase metric on M the expression of σ(x) changes; however the space contraction rate are expected to satisfy the large variation can be, in general, expressed by the time deriva- deviation property which is, in this case, called Fluctua- tive of a suitable observable so that the long time aver- tion Relation, FR, and it is informally written as ages σ+ of σ(x) do not depend on the metric, like most physically interesting observables (e.g. the Lyapunov ex- ponents). See comments following Eq.(2.1) and Eq.(5.2) Psrb(p) log = τ 1 p σ+ + o(τ) (6.4) Given an attracting set on which the evolution is an Psrb( p) Anosov system, i.e. motionA on is a smooth continuous − 2 A hyperbolic flow x Stx, or a smooth discrete hyper- and more precisely formulated, as existence of a “large bolic map2 x Sx;→ let σ (x) be the surface contraction deviation” rate ζ(p) satisfying Eq.(6.3): where the 1 is rate on the surface→ andA consider the quantity inserted for later reference. τ A 1 σ (St) While the formal probability density for the events p, A ± p = dt continuous time, τ> 0 i.e. Psrb( p), is a difficult quantity strongly dependent τ Z0 σ+ ± τ (6.1) on the dynamical system, the interest of the FR is that 1 σ (Skx) Eq.(6.3),(6.4) are, under the above assumptions, an exact p = A discrete time, τ integer τ σ+ symmetry of ζ(p) and, at least in some cases, FR deals Xk=0 with a quantity (σ (x)) which has physical meaning (en- A where σ+ is the infinite time average of σ (x), which is x- tropy generation rate) and mathematical meaning (phase independent, aside exceptional x’s in a 0-volumeA set, and coincides with the average of σ with respect to the SRB

15The rate ζ(p) is defined so that the probability of finding 1 τ σ(Stx) dtdt [p,p + δp] is exp τ max[p,p+δp] ζ(p) for p τ 0 σ+ ∈ ∈ 14A positive σ(x) means that the volume contracts near x: hence ( Rp∗,p∗) where p∗ 1; it exists and is analytic if σ(x) is the − ≥ in stationary states the average σ+ of σ must be 0, [29]. phase space contraction of an Anosov evolution. ≥

6 7 space contraction rate): therefore a check of Eq.(6.4) can see also [37, p.4]. If FR could be applied literally there become a test of the chaotic hypothesis. would be no way to see a heat flow from cold to warm 6 The fluctuations relation is, for time reversible evolu- during 10− sec before “trying” to see it, say once every tions, a symmetry of the SRB distributions. However it second, for at least 1018/106 times (i.e. 103 billion ∼ ∼ requires that: days). See Sec.IX for a possible answer to the problem. 16 (i) the motion on the attracting surface has the Anosov property, A The FR bears formal similarity with identities arising (ii) and at the same time it is reversible; hence, in the in the evolution of equilibrium states, or more generally frequent cases in which is not the full phase space but with the evolution of initial distributions on phase space just a smooth surface inA it, it should be I = , quite which are symmetric under time reversal but not station- unlikely if I is the usual time reversal symmetryA A (i.e. ary. The deep difference between the latter identities and velocities reversal), the above FR is briefly commented in Sec.XIX) below. (iii) furthermore, if (i) and (ii) hold, the FR concerns the Unfortunately the name “fluctuation relation” has fluctuations of the surface area of , and not of the full been often used in all cases, causing great confusion to volume: which is very hard to access,A as itself. loom on the subject. A and the three conditions strongly limit a literal applica- bility of FR and lead to the analysis of further properties of the considered evolutions, see Sec.IX , XVII. VII. NONEQUILIBRIUM ENSEMBLES. ENSEMBLES EQUIVALENCE Nevertheless it can be applied to systems that are only mildly out of equilibrium. If the system, remaining time reversal symmetric, is set out of equilibrium by the action In general given an evolution equation on a phase of small forces and is in contact with thermostats with space M depending on one or more parameters, denoted E = ν, E, . . . , the SRB stationary states, i.e. the distri- small differences of the respective temperatures, call ε { } a parameter measuring the size of the forces and of the butions that are generated by all points of M, excepting a subset of M with 0 volume, form a collection c of temperature differences. Then, if for ε = 0 the system E has the Anosov property on the full phase space, it will probability distributions µE parameterized by the given continue to have such property also for small ε = 0, be- parameters and each of which can be called an “ensem- cause Anosov systems are structurally stable, [9].6 Hence ble”. the attracting set will remain identical to the full phase Even in the cases, considered in this section, in which space and time reversalA will be a symmetry of the motions there is only one parameter ν and CH holds, there might on the attracting set and the FR assumptions will remain be several distinct attracting surfaces and therefore more verified. This was the case of the systems to which the than a single SRB distribution µν : if so, further param- FR has been applied, [1], and tested, [21], to explain the eters will have to be added to distinguish the various fluctuations of the phase space contraction observed in possibilities, just as done in equilibrium statistical me- the simulation in [35]. chanics in presence of phase transitions to distinguish In attempting to test or use the FR in systems which the different pure phases, [38–40]. are not very small it is not reasonable to hope that the A key question is whether the same system can be smallness of the above ε does not depend on the sys- described by different equations of motion. There are tem size, although important cases (lattices of coupled several instances in which this is possible: for instance Anosov maps) are known in which ε can be taken inde- a fluid motion can be equally well described by, say, a pendent of the size, [11, 36]: therefore it might be thought Navier-Stokes equation or by a (far more complex) col- that FR becomes irrelevant in most interesting cases, 1. lection of molecules, in contact with a thermostat and at Clearly more properties are needed to deal with the sys- given density, at least if attention is given to observations tems that are not small perturbations of Anosov systems. depending on large scale properties and performed over In Sec.IX the applicability far beyond the latter cases will long time scales, [41]. be discussed. Even for Navier-Stokes (NS) fluids there might be sev- eral different equations, simpler than the ultimate molec- Remark: Often the Eq.(4.5) raises the question “how can ular models, that can describe the class of phenomena it be relevant” as the Boltzmann’s constant in the de- considered relevant in given physical situations. nominator is likely to give a huge value to the inverse For instance it has been convincingly argued that time scale σ which determines the time scale over which h i macroscopic transport coefficients can be obtained by re- the FR yields predictions? For instance imagining to placing the equations of motion of molecules by simple(r) put 1 cm3 of steel (with faces of 1 cm2) in contact be- tween two reservoirs at temperatures T = 300oK and T + δT = 310oK the average of the entropy production ˙ δT rate, Q 2 , can be expressed via the steel thermal con- 16 kB T The problem is considered, by some colleagues, a “disaster” δT 2 ∆ 18 1 ductivity χ as χ( ) : and the result is 10 sec− , for FR, making it physically irrelevant. T kB ∼

7 8 models, suitable for simulations, obeying modified equa- whose effect is to balance, in the average, the “energy” tions of motion which can even be non-Newtonian: in the injected by the forcing context of molecular simulations this has been originated The complete equation has therefore the form in the early ’80s, [8, 32]. A first example of equations al- ternative to the NS equations to describe a developed turbulence flow is found in [42]. x˙ = G(x)+ f(x) νLx (7.2) It is natural to consider, together with the collection − of SRB distributions µ c for a given equation de- ν ∈ E At fixed f and for each “friction” ν > 0 small enough, pending on a parameter ν, the collection µE′ ′ of SRB the evolution will be supposed to satisfy the CH and to distributions corresponding to a different equation∈E pa- lead to a unique stationary (“SRB”) distribution µν . rameterized by a new parameter denoted E, which on The collection of the SRB distributions µν , as ν varies, physical or just heuristic grounds describes equivalently will be denoted c, and each of them defines a nonequi- the same class of phenomena, i.e. predicts the same prop- librium ensembleE. erties for large classes of observables. Next consider a different equation in which the friction Remarks: (i) The equivalence should mean that it is pos- coefficient ν in Eq.(7.2) is replaced by a multiplier α(x) so sible to establish a correspondence between the ensembles defined that a selected observable Ω is an exact constant c 2 (i.e. the distributions) in and the ones in ′ so that for of motion. For instance the cases Ω(x) = x or Ω(x) = each ν there is a correspondingE E(ν) and theE average of (x Lx) lead to new equations of motionx ˙ = G(x) + c · “most” observables in the µ and µ′ in ′ should f(x) α(x)Lx with, respectively: ν ∈E E(ν) E − coincide (or be close). (ii) This is quite analogous to the description of equilib- x G(x)+ x f(x) rium states in Statistical Mechanics (SM): the canonical α(x)= · · or x Lx distribution µV of N = ρV molecules of a gas in a con- (7.3) β Lx G(x·)+ Lx f(x) tainer of volume V depends, at fixed density ρ, on a α(x)= · · 1 Lx Lx parameter (inverse temperature) β = (kB T )− and the · ′V microcanonical distribution µE depends on a parameter Then the stationary states for the new equations form a (total energy) E. If E and β are so related that collection of stationary states ′ with elements parame- N E ′ terized by the value E of the constant of motion Ω intro- V 1 2 3 1 µ ( p )= Nβ− (7.1) E 2m i 2 duced by the multiplier α. Xi=1 Quite generally the motion generated by the new equa- ′ tions is eventually restricted to a bounded region, be- then the average of “many” observables O, µ V (O), is E cause of the action of the friction and of conservation equal or close to µ (O). β laws possibly valid for the time reversible system in ab- (iii) Actually, in SM, in the limit as V , ρ = sence of forcing. N/V fixed, for any local observable. i.e. depending→ ∞ only Therefore for ν small it can be expected that in the on the configuration of the molecules located in a finite stationary states α(x) fluctuates leading to a homoge- region, the canonical and microcanonical averages are not nization phenomenon, i.e. to the property that in the only close but strictly equal, at least in absence of long stationary state for the new equation range forces or of phase transitions, [38, 40]. (iv) And, still considering (SM), in presence of phase x˙ = G(x)+ f(x) α(x)Lx (7.4) transitions at β it will be necessary to label the dis- − tributions in c by further parameters a: in this case E large classes of observables have the same averages in the distributions in the ensemble will also have to c ′ the distribution µ and in the distribution µ′ belonging be distinguished by an equal numberE of parameters a ν E ′ to the new ensemble ′, of stationary distributions for and a correspondence between a and a can be estab- E ′ Eq.(7.4), provided ν and E are kept related by ν = µ′ (α): lished so that, under the condition Eq.(7.1), it is still E ′V V c µa′,E(O) = µa,β(O), for local observables, in the limit lim µν (O) = lim µE′ (O), (7.5) ν 0 ν 0 V . → → → ∞ A first example is obtained by considering a system or, equivalently, if E = µν (Ω). More formally: described by equations on x Rn which are obtained as ∈ If motions following Eq.(7.2) eventually develop on follows a ball M generating a family c of stationary distribu- E (a) letx ˙ = G(x) be a time reversible equation for the tions parameterized by ν and if the motions following the time reversal Ix = x (i.e. G(x)= G( x)) Eq.(7.4) are also eventually confined in a ball M ′, gen- − − (b) add a reversible forcing f(x), with If = fI (i.e. erating a family ′, then Eq.(7.5) holds for arbitrarily E f(x)= f( x)) fixed observables O, provided the correspondence between − c (c) and a dissipative term, νLx, with L linear and pos- µν and µE′ (ν) is such that ν = µE′ (ν)(α) or, equivalently, itive (Lx x > 0, if x = 0)− depending on a parameter ν, E(ν)= µ (Ω). · 6 ν

8 9

As in the case of ensembles equivalence in equilibrium The latter two, seemingly insurmountable, difficulties not all ensembles are equivalent, not even in the thermo- are however intertwined and tend, in several cases, to dynamic limit, therefore the observables Ω defining the “compensate”. We begin with a simple case. ensemble have to be selected on a case by case basis. A remarkable property was discovered for a Hamilto- The above statement has been tested in a few nian evolution with n degrees of freedom for x = (p, q) 17 1 2 cases: involving strongly truncated NS equations, [43], with H(p, q)= 2 p + V (q) and subject also to a friction Lorenz96 equations, [45], shell model for turbulence, [46]. force νp. Namely, under very general conditions on − The conjecture will be analyzed in some detail, and the potential V (typically just boundedness of the sur- considerably strengthened, in Sec.XVII for the stationary faces H = const), the Lyapunov exponents λ0 λ1 ≥ ≥ states of the incompressible NS equation with periodic λd/2 1 ...λ2n 1 of the motion are such that, [47], − ≥ − boundary conditions. But it is convenient to discuss first in which sense the FR can be made relevant for systems 1 ν (λj + λ2n 1 j )= j =0,...,n 1 (8.1) irreversibly evolving in presence of strong friction, and 2 − − − 2 − to exhibit a few more applications of the FR to classical and new problems. In other words the symplectic symmetry of the Hamil- In particular a key problem is whether the FR can be of tonian systems (which in absence of friction implies any utility if the attracting set is a surface of dimension λj +λ2n 1 j 0) leaves, in presence of friction, Eq.(8.1) − − ≡ lower than that of M and, althoughA the evolution equa- as a “remnant”, at least if the friction force has the sim- tions remain reversible, it is I = , i.e. reversibility ple form νp. Furthermore Eq.(8.1) holds identically for A 6 A − does not hold as a symmetry for motions on the attract- the eigenvalues λj (x) of the Jacobian matrix J(x) of the ing set (as, instead, required for the validity of the FR), flow at each point x. see comments (i-iii) in Sec.VI . Remarkably the relation Eq.(8.1) has been extended, [48], to the time reversible cases in which the friction νp is replaced by a force α(p, q)p with the multiplier− α such that evolution conserves− the total kinetic energy 1 p2 VIII. STRONG DISSIPATION: ATTRACTING 2 SET SIZE. LYAPUNOV PAIRS. exactly, as in some of the simplest thermostat models, p ∂ V (q) [49], i.e. α = · q . − p2 As forcing and dissipation increase the attracting set In the latter systems Eq.(8.1) not only holds with ν may become a small subset of phase space: and, if replaced by the time average of α but it follows from the A stronger property that the evolution t S x is such that, the CH holds, it becomes a smooth surface of dimension → t lower than the full dimension of phase space. given t0 > 0, the matrix W = ∂i(St0 x)j has the property T 1 In this case although the motion on is a Anosov that the logarithms of the eigenvalues of (W W ) 2 are t0 A system it may appear, at first, that it does not even make times λt0,j (x) > 0, j =0,... 2n (depending on t0), which 1 ν sense to ask whether a FR holds because: satisfy (λt0 ,j(x)+ λt0,2n 1 j(x)) = or respectively 2 − − − 2 1 α , where the average is intended over S x for t − 2 h i t ∈ (1) it is not possible to think that it could express proper- [0,t ].18 ties of the volume contraction on : the main difficulty is 0 that time reversal symmetry, essentialA for the FR, is lost since, even if the equations of motion are time reversible, the action of the time reversal I will likely map the at- 18The proof of the pairing symmetry in the above mentioned tracting set into a “repelling” set I disjoint from . A A A cases is that the Jacobian matrix ∂i(Stx)j t=0 is seen to be the The motion on remains hyperbolic, as assumed by CH, | ν sum of the Jacobian for the Hamiltonian flow of H(p, q) 2 pq but it no longerA has the desired symmetry in time. ν − plus the identity times 2 , [47]. In the case of α a similar (2) Furthermore the FR deals with the volume contrac- property holds replacing− ν with α, as is seen via a calcu- T −nνt tion on the full phase space but the hyperbolic character lation. If J(t) = ∂i(Stx)j then J(t)P J(t) = Pe (or (assumed by the CH) of the motion on the attracting set −n R t α(x(t))dt 0 1 Pe 0 ) where P = (1 being the n n  1 0  × could establish, if for some reason a new time reversal I − def − 1 νt were spawned as a symmetry on , a property of the con- identity) because J(t) = J0e 2 with J0 a symplectic ma- A e T traction of surface elements in ; however their analysis trix so that J0P J0 = P (proposition 24, Sec.3.12 in [50]). A T would require a, highly unlikely, detailed understanding Therefore let v be an eigenvector J0 J0v = λv then the fol- 2 −1 the geometry of the attracting surface . lowing chain of identities, using P = 1 shows that λ is A an eigenvalue, with eigenvector P v: −

T T −1 J J0v = λv P J J0v = λP v J P J0P P v = λP v 0 → 0 → − 0 −1 −1T T −1 17 J J P v = λP v (J J) P v = λP v Doubts have been raised in [44]: which might be related to → 0 0 → 0 the use of a rather large value of ν in a strongly truncated NS ν −1 t 1 equation in 2D: it is hoped that the latter results will be tested impliyng pairing to 2 (respectively to t 0 2 α(x(t))dt) T− 1 − again at smaller ν (in spite of computational difficulties). for the matrix (J(t) J(t)) 2 . [47, 48]. R

9 10

Eq.(8.1), called pairing symmetry, is certainly very spe- of the attracting set and the accompanying breakdown cial, [8], but it suggests, [21], that the dimension of the of time reversal symmetry for the motions confined to , attracting set is equal to twice the number of non neg- the only ones of statistical interest, and the consequentA ative LyapunovAexponents: because it suggests that the apparent irrelevance of the phase space contraction σ(x), pairs with two negative exponents simply correspond to to which also contribute the contracting directions stick- the phase space compression in the directions that “stick ing out of the attracting surface. out” of the surface . The second of the two difficulties mentioned is ad- A If so the latter directions certainly do not contribute dressed in the next section, on the basis of the proposal to the contraction of the surface of .19 in [20, 52]. A An arbitrary number of negative exponents can be added to any spectrum by adding arbitrarily many di- mensions whose coordinates contract to 0. It is only if IX. DISSIPATION. TIME REVERSAL & FR. there is a pairing symmetry that the negative pairs can be conjectured to be unambiguously identified: and it Consider a time reversible evolution depending on a can be hoped that the same remains valid if the pairing forcing parameter and, still assuming the CH, suppose is only approximate, which is a property that is often the forcing, hence the dissipation, to grow so strong encountered, see Sec.XVIII for examples. that the attracting set becomes a surface of dimen- A This idea has been discussed in the analysis of a sim- sion smaller than that of phase space. ulation dedicated to tests of the CH and FR in a system Then the time reversal symmetry I is spontaneously with pairing symmetry, [21, Sec.6], and its relevance for broken in the sense that it ceases to be a symmetry for strongly dissipative systems like the Navier-Stokes flows the motions that develop on the attracting set. It re- has been proposed in [52, Sec.5], see Sec.XVIII below. mains a symmetry for the motions in phase space, but it has little relevance for the statistical properties (with Remarks: (1) Accepting the above proposal, the dimen- respect to the SRB distribution) of the motions because, sion of the attracting surface is determined when the asymptotically, they are attracted to . The time re- A system has a (possibly approximate) pairing symmetry, versal image I of is quite generallyA a repeller and and it is identified as twice the number of non negative no motion (exceptA aA set of data with 0 volume) evolves Lyapunov exponents. towards it. (2) It is worth stressing the general difference between Therefore a natural question is whether the continuing the latter dimension, that will be called fluctuation di- existence of the global time reversal symmetry I can be mension of (or fd-dimension), and the Kaplan-Yorke A accompanied by a map I of to itself which is still a dimension of : the Kaplan-Yorke dimension (or ky- 2 A A smooth isometry, with I 1 and StI = IS t in the dimension) is a measure of the fractal properties of the e ≡ − flow case or SI = IS 1 in the case of maps. SRB attractor contained in the attracting set and it is − e e e The question has been analyzed in [20] where a geo- not larger than the fluctuation dimension; withA which it metric propertye hase been identified which, when holding, coincides if the SRB distribution has a density on phase space. In general the ky-dimension is a fraction of the shows that a “local time reversal symmetry” I, defined as a map of the attracting set into itself, is spawned fd-dimension. A e (3) The above discussion, heuristically proposes how to out of a global time reversal symmetry I, as a parame- ter varies and changes the dimension of making it a determine the dimension of the attracting surface under A the CH when the pairing symmetry holds. surface of dimension smaller than the dimension of the phase space M. However it is unclear whether the pairing symmetry, The latter property will seem at first sight quite spe- exact or approximate, can be of any help to address the cial. However it is enjoyed by a class of systems of inter- second of the above difficulties, i.e. the lower dimension est in applications and at the same time is a structurally stable property (i.e. it remains valid under small pertur- bations of the dynamics). The property was named “Ax- iom C” because it is a modification of the “Axiom B” 19Failure to realize the difference between Anosov motions on property introduced in [10]. the attracting surface versus Anosov motions on the entire To visualize the geometry of the Axiom C property phase space in chaotic systems satisfying the CH together consider the simpler case of a time reversible map S and with time reversal symmetry is responsible for statements, imagine that the attracting surface becomes disjoint [8, p.220], like: “If there were such systems then it could be from its time reversal image I , becauseA a parameter proved that they would generate relatively simple attractors, controlling the evolution is raisedA above a critical value, with equal numbers of positive and negative Lyapunov expo- nents. Because the simple geometric argument of Section 7.8 see Fig.2. shows that nonequilibrium attractors are actually generated Then the stable manifolds of the points in are not entirely contained in but extend out of andA intersect by any stable time reversible, steady dynamics, the applica- A A bility of the Anosov proofs is evidently rare to vanishing”, I on manifolds which are unstable manifolds for the A 1 [1],[20],[51]. points of I . Likewise the evolution S− will have I as A A

10 11

1 a attracting set out of which the S− -stable manifolds of maximum number of non negative Lyapunov exponents. the points of I emerge and extend until they intersect Then the local exponents with labels j = 0,...,n+ 1 the surface onA its unstable manifolds. and the corresponding negative ones contribute σ (x−)= A n+ A So out of each point x of emerge two manifolds inter- j=0 λj (x)+ λ2n 1 j (x)= n+ν to the phase space con- A − − secting respectively on the contracting and expanding tractionP and n n+ pairs of negative exponents should A − manifolds at x restricted to for St and at the same time be discarded in computing α ; so that the total average A A the two manifolds intersect also I and the intersections phase space contraction on the attracting set σ ,+ will be A are the stable and unstable manifoldsA for S at some point proportional to the total average phase space contraction x′ = Ix (linked by a 1-dimensional curve). (i.e. average σ+ of minus the divergence of the equation n+ n+ of motion) σ ,+ = n+ν = nν = σ+. The correspondence x′ = P x, thus established between A n n and I , commutes with the time evolution, because Remark that the number n n+ is defined in terms − theA manifoldsA whose intersection defines the correspon- of the Lyapunov exponents: hence it does not depend on dence P : I are covariant under the action of S: the point x. The conclusion is that in systems with time hence P Sx =A←→ASP x for all x or x I . reversal and pairing symmetry satisfying the CH and ax- ∈ A ∈ A iom C, a fluctuation relation for the surface contraction n+ 20 of , σ (x)= n σ(x), holds. x′ I A A A n+ attr I x Set n N with attr = dimension of the at- tracting surface≡ N and =N dimension of the phase space. e Then the CH combinedN with Axiom C and a parity prop- 1 τ σ(Stx) erty will give, for the probability of τ − dt = 0 σ+ x x 1 τ σA(Stx) R A τ − dt, the relation 0 σA,+ R Fig.2: Case of a map S. The first figure in Fig.2 illustrates P (p) Nattr srb τ N σ+p+o(τ) a point x and its attracting manifold, and a local part = e (9.1) ∈ A Psrb( p) of its stable manifold that extends until I intersecting it in − A attr the hatched line (stable manifold on and unstable on I ). in the notation of Eq.(6.4), [21], because σ ,+ = N σ+: A ′ A A N attr Likewise the second figure describes a point x on I with a i.e. the universal constant 1 in (6.4) is replaced by N . −1 A local part of its stable manifold for S (extending to intersect This covers the FR in systems verifying the pairingN on a unstable manifold, hatched). The third figure shows the A rule: but, admittedly, such systems are not really common (1-dimensional) intersection between the stable manifold of a in the applications. point x and the unstable manifold of the point x′ I : ∈ A ∈ A A much larger class of systems can be imagined if in the figure such intersection is a unidimensional curve that the Lyapunov exponents, arranged as in Eq.(8.1), sat- connects x with x′ (uniquely determined by x) establishing the 1 isfy (λj +λ2n 1 j )= cj with cj close to a constant (i.e. ′ 2 correspondence P : I defining P , with x = Px. See j − − A → A cj C( 2n ) with C(ξ) a smooth function. caption to Fig.2. This∼ property arises in a few important cases. For The picture requires a few assumptions of technical instance in simulations of reversible models for the 2D nature to avoid occurrence of some more complex pos- incompressible Navier-Stokes equation in periodic geom- sibilities (for instance it is necessary to exclude that the etry, [43? ]. contracting manifold emerging from wraps around I Suppose that the local Lyapunov exponents are such 1 A A that (λj (x)+ λ2n 1 j (x)) = cj (x) and let λj , cj be the rather than meeting it transversally): the mathematical 2 − − definition of the “axiom C” property can be found in [20] respective time averages. Then it can be still imagined and is a modification of the notion of “axiom B”, [10]. that corresponding pairs λj , λ2n 1 j of exponents of op- posite sign are exponents concerning− − the motion on the A consequence is that the map I = P I maps into itself (as well as I into itself) and is a time reversalA attracting set; particularly if the system is close to one for symmetry for the restrictionA of S toe (and to I ). which the pairing rule holds and cj is close to a constant. A A By an argument similar to the one presented in the The above analysis exhibits a structurally stable mech- pairing symmetrical cases above, a large deviations rela- anism, [20], which, if holding, implies that although time tion might be obtained, for the total contraction σ(x), reversal is lost as a symmetry on an attracting set , it A might be accompanied by a new map I on which can be regarded as a new time reversal symmetryA for motions evolving on . Therefore it is interestinge to see whether 20It would seem that smoothness of I should also be required a FR can alsoA be established: heuristic ideas about such because the axiom C implies only H¨older continuity for I, see question, with attention to a few possible applications e [53]. However a careful examination of the FT proof shows will now be presented in the rest of this section. that it is sufficient that the restrictions to of the stablee and In presence of a pairing symmetry to the level 1 ν, A − 2 unstable manifolds of the points a are smooth manifolds Eq.(8.1), suppose that the pairs of negative exponents de- and this is implied by the assumed∈ smoothness A of itself (by A scribe the approach to the attracting set and call n+ the CH) and by the smoothness of the global manifolds.

11 12

attr 21 similar to Eq.(9.1) with N σ replaced by σ (x) = E-independent, smooth, time reversal symmetry I, N A def Pj∈L λj (b) for E = 0 the equations are supposed to satisfy the P σ(x) with P =1 − , where L is the set of Lya- − Pj∈L λj CH with attracting set coinciding with the full phase punov exponents and L the subset formed by the pairs space (as in the cases in the footnote 21).22 of negative exponents. Leading− to a FR with a controlled For E = 0 the equations continue to be time reversal modification of the slope in p, at least if the pairing func- symmetric6 with the same symmetry map I.23 tions c (x) can be found, see Sec.XVIII for a non trivial j The dynamics is a Anosov system and it remains such example. at small E: the attracting set coincides with the full The above may apply to time reversible systems with phase space (by the structural stability of CH) and the Lyapunov spectrum obeying a pairing rule at least ap- FT holds for the SRB distributions.24 proximately; and could be extended, possibly, to irre- It is therefore interesting to find whether the average versible ones if the latter fall under the equivalence prop- phase space contraction σE,+ is a function of E with in- erties mentioned in Sec.VII. terpretation that goes beyond its being a quantity associ- ated with universal large fluctuations of the dissipation. Remarks (i) In this respect it is worth coming back to In particular it is interesting to find an interpretation of the issue mentioned in the remark concluding Sec.VI. the multiple derivatives ∂n σ . Which pointed out that when considering many particle E E,+ E=0 The phase space contraction |σ (x), briefly σ(x), will systems, like for instance the steel cube brought up as E be supposed to have the Taylor expansion: an example, the phase space contraction might have an average too large, due to the size of the Boltzmann’s s 0 2 constant. And consequently the FR would fail to be of σ(x)= EiJi (x)+ O(E ) (10.1) any relevance for the fluctuations statistics. Xi=1 (ii) However in such cases, as in any macroscopic system, and, having assumed CH, the large deviation rate ζ(p) the phase space contraction is very large: but the FR exists (model dependent) and is analytic in p for p in should be applied to the contraction of the surface of the interval ( p∗,p∗), p∗ 1, within which it can vary, the attracting set. To do so the above axiom C and a [34, 55]. − ≥ pairing property may be of help: for instance in presence On general grounds the function ζ(p) is the Laplace of exact pairing the FR holds with the σ+ replaced by transform of λ(β) = lim 1 log eβτ(p 1)P (dp) attr τ τ − τ N σ+. The dimension attr in large systems will →∞ N N where Pτ (dp) is the PDF of theR variable p = usually be : and in order to apply the FR the 1 t ≪ N σ(Stx)dt in the SRB distribution. Once λ(β) average phase space contraction must be corrected by τσE,+ 0 attr R the factor N . is ”known” then ζ(p) is recovered via a Legendre trans- N form; ζ(p) = max β σ (p 1) λ(β) , [34, 56]. (iii) Since is, in the case (i), a number of the order β h i+ − − of a multipleN of Avogadro’s number this is sufficient By using the cumulant expansion for λ
(β) we find that 1 2 1 3 to turn kB Ta into R0 = kB , with R0 being of the λ(β) = 2! β C2 + 3! β C3 + ... where the coefficients Cj N ∞ T T order of the gas constant: and this converts Eq.(4.5) to are σ(St1 )σ(St2 ) ...σ(Stj−1 )σ( ) + dt1 ... if ... + ˙ −∞h · · · · i h i Qa denoteR the cumulants of the variables σ(x). attr a and R0Ta is no longer very small. N R0Ta In our case the cumulants of order j have size O(Gj ) (iv) AlsoP attr, in the systems like the ones in the def example inN Sec.IV, V, is typically not of the order of with G = E , by Eq.(10.1), so that: Avogadro’s number: macroscopic systems often can be | | σ 2 described by macroscopic equations and the number of ζ(p)= h i+ (p 1)2 + O((p 1)3G3) (10.2) positive exponents can be identified with the number 2C2 − − of positive exponents of the “equivalent” macroscopic (remark that the first term in r.h.s. gives the central equation; the latter very often has a rather small limit theorem). Eq.(10.2), together with the FR Eq.(6.3), number of positive exponents so attr can be small: in conclusion the FR could be appliedN to classes of system which admit microscopic and macroscopic equivalent representations. 21To fix ideas think of a Hamiltonian system constrained to keep (iv) A non trivial example is analyzed in the total kinetic energy constant, for instance via a Gaussian Sec.XVII , XVIII. constraint, as considered in many applications, [32]: in ab- sence of external forcing, and assuming CH, the SRB distri- bution is quite generally explicitly known and equivalent to the canonical distribution, [32]. 22 X. FLUCTUATION DISSIPATION THEOREM In other words at E = 0 the evolution is a Anosov system. 23The symmetry could also depend on E, becoming IE, however further assumptions would be needed, like differentiability, Suppose that a dynamical system equations [54]. 24Remark that this is an important case whose occurrence has (a) depend on parameters E = (E1, E2,...) and satisfy a been considered “rare to evanescent” in [8, p.220].

12 13

yields at fixed p the key relations: of the observable q(x)= Ej ∂Ej σ. Defining dimensionless j-current q = qj (x) (at fixed j) as: 1 σ = C + O(G3) (10.3) h i+ 2 2 τ/2 1 def Define, [34, 56]: Ji(x) = ∂Ei σ(x) = current, Lij = Ej ∂Ej σ(Stx)dt = q (11.1) τ Z τ/2 ∂Ej Ji(x) + E=0 = transport coefficients; and study Lij . − h i | 3 In the r.h.s.of the first of Eq.(10.3) discard O(G ): it where the factor E is there only to keep σ and E ∂ σ becomes quadratic in E with coefficient 1 C , making use j j Ej 2 2 with the same dimensions, the really essential property of the exponential decay of SRB-correlations in Anosov of q (x) is its odd symmetry under time reversal, as σ(x). systems, given by: j Then if Pτ (dp, dq) is the joint PDF of p, q the same proof of the FT in [1, 12, 34] yields also the existence of 1 ∞ 0 0 0 0 dt J (St )J ( ) + J + J + (10.4) a rate function ζ(p, q) for P with the symmetry: 2 Z h i · j · i − h i i h j i E=0 τ
−∞ where convergence is implied by the strong mixing prop- ζ(p, q)= ζ( p, q) + p σE , for all p, q (11.2) erties of the SRB distribution due to the CH. − − ,+ On the other hand the expansion of σ in the l.h.s.of + for the joint large fluctuations of the variables σ (x), Eq.(10.3) to second order in E gives: h i E Ej ∂Ej σ(x). The ζ(p, q) can be computed, in the same way as ζ(p) 1 in Sec.X, by considering first the transform λ(β1,β2): σ = ∂ ∂ σ E E (10.5) h i+ 2 Ei Ej h i+ E=0 i j Xij

1 τ(β1 (p 1) σ ++β2 (q 1) Ej ∂E σ +) lim log e − h i − h j i Pτ (dp, dq) because the first order term vanishes, see Eq.(10.1). τ τ →∞ R If µ+(dx) denotes the SRB distribution, the r.h.s.of (11.3) 1 and then the Legendre transform, abridging the SRB av- Eq.(10.5) is the sum of 2 EiEj times ∂Ei ∂Ej σ(x)µ+(dx) erage E with , which equals the sum of the following threeR terms: h·i ,+ h·i+ (i) ∂Ei ∂Ej σ(x)µ+(dx),

(ii)R ∂Ei σ(x)∂Ej µ+(dx) + (i j) ↔ max β1 (p 1) σ + + β2 (q 1) Ej ∂Ej σ + (iii)R σ(x)∂ ∂ µ (dx)), all evaluated at E = 0. β1,β2 − h i − h i Ei Ej + (11.4) TheR first addend is 0 (by time reversal), the third ad- λ(β ,β ) = ζ(p, q) − 1 2 dend is also 0 (as σ =0 at E = 0). Hence:
The function λ(β), β = (β1,β2), is evaluated by the cumulant expansion, as above, and one finds: 0 0 ∂Ei ∂Ej σ + E=0 = ∂Ej Ji + + ∂Ei Jj + E=0 (10.6) h i |  h i h i | 1 and it is easy to check, again by using time reversal, that: λ(β)= β, C β)+ O(E3) (11.5) 2 0 where C is the 2 2 matrix of the second order cumu- ∂Ej Ji + E=0 = ∂Ej Ji + E=0 = Lij (10.7) × h i | h i | lants. The coefficient C11 is given by C2 appearing in Thus equating r.h.s and l.h.s. of Eq.(10.3), as ex- Eq.(10.3),(10.4); C22 is given by the same expression with pressed respectively by Eq.(10.4) and Eq.(10.6) the ma- σ replaced by Ej ∂Ej σ while C12 is the mixed cumulant: Lij +Lji trix 2 is obtained, [57]. At least if i = j this is a “Green-Kubo formula”, a rela- ∞ σ(St ) Ej ∂E σ( ) + σ(St ) + Ej ∂E σ( ) + dt tion sometimes called ”fluctuation dissipation theorem”. Z h · j · i − h · i h j · i
It is however very different from “Onsager’s reciprocity” −∞ (11.6) which would be Lij = Lji. The latter will be discusses and convergence is again implied by the mixing proper- in the next section. ties of the SRB distributions due to the CH. (p 1) σ Hence if w = − h i+ we get:  (q 1) Ej ∂Ej σ +  XI. ONSAGER’S RECIPROCITY − h i

1 1 3 ζ(p, q)= C− w, w + O(E ) (11.7) A far reaching extension is necessary to obtain Lij = 2 Lji which will lead to reciprocity, [55], and to further
extensions, [58]. completely analogous to Eq.(10.2). But the FT in The main remark is that FT theorem can be extended Eq.(11.2), implies that ζ(p, q) ζ( p, q) is q indepen- to give properties of joint SRB distribution of σ(x) and dent: this immediately means:− − −

13 14

parameters independent (usually just a “velocity rever- sal”), and therefore for systems verifying the Chaotic Hy- 1 1 3 (C− )22 Ej ∂Ej σ + (C− )21 σ + = 0+O(E ) (11.8) pothesis, suggests that the fluctuation relations might be − h i − h i extended to fluctuations of more general observables. At 1 which, from (C− )22 = C11/ det C, becomes the analogue least for small perturbations of Anosov systems and for of Eq.(10.3): smooth Axiom C systems, see caption to Fig.2. Consider first the fluctuations of the phase space con- 1 traction σ(x) and those of a second observable ϕ(x) with E ∂ σ = C + O(E3) (11.9) h j Ej i+ 2 12 definite parity under time reversal: so σ(Ix) = σ(x) and ϕ(x)= ϕ(Ix) (or ϕ(x)= ϕ(Ix)). − − Then, proceeding as in the derivation of Eq.(10.4) Consider a SRB distribution µsrb for the system: let through (10.7) (i.e. expanding both sides of Eq.(11.9) σ > 0, ϕ be the SRB time averages of σ, ϕ. Call h i+ h i+ to first order in the Ei’s and using Eq.(11.8) we get that “fluctuation pattern” π a function on [0, τ]: t π(t) = ∂ ∂ σ is given by the integral in Eq.(10.4). This (s(t),f(t)). → Ei h Ej i+ means that Lij = Lji and the general Green-Kubo for- The evolution of a point x in phase space such that mulae follow together with Onsager’s reciprocity. Thus GK, and OR, are in the cases considered here, s(t) σ(Stx) < ε, a consequence of FT and of its extension, Eq.(11.2), in | − | for t [0, τ] (12.1) the limit E 0, when combined with the expansion f(t) ϕ(Stx)) < η ∈ → | − | Eq.(10.2) for entropy fluctuations. Those theorems and will be called a motion which shadows the pattern π in the fast decay of the σσ correlations, [12], are all natural τ,ε,η the time interval [0, τ] and it will be written x π. consequences of (CH) for reversible systems (which are The “time reversal” of the pattern π will be the∼ pattern the starting point of our considerations). Reversibility is Iπ = ( s(τ t), f(τ t)) (or if ϕ(x) is even under time here assumed both in equilibrium and in non equilibrium: reversal−Iπ =− ( −s(τ −t),f(τ t))). this is a feature of Gaussian thermostat models but by no − − − The SRB probability of a trajectory x Stx to follow means of all models; the E-independence of the reversibil- τ,ε,η → a pattern π will be denoted P ( x π ); the argument ity map is also essential but in most reversible models it τ { ∼ } is just the velocity reversal map, which is independent of at the basis of the Fluctuation Theorem can be applied E. to study the ratio: Of course the OR and GK only hold around equilib- τ,ε,η rium, i.e. they are properties of E–derivatives evaluated 1 Pτ ( x π ) at E = 0; on the other hand the expansion for λ(β) is a log { τ,ε∼ } (12.2) τ P ( x Iπ ) general consequence of the correlation decay and the FT τ { ∼ } also holds for non equilibrium stationary states, i.e. for and for reversible Anosov systems leads, at first surpris- E = 0 small25, and can be considered a generalization of ingly, immediately to the result: the6 OR and GK. Evidence for the relation between Lii, Green-Kubo for- τ,ε,η Pτ ( x π ) mulae, and FT was pointed out by P.Garrido in [21] in τ σ + p+o(τ) { τ,ε,η∼ } = e h i (12.3) an effort to interpret results of various numerical experi- Pτ ( x Iπ ) ments and an apparent incompatibility between the a pri- { ∼ } asymptotically as τ and to lowest order in the ori known non Gaussian nature of the distribution π (p) τ precision ε, η. → ∞ and the ”Gaussian looking” empirical distributions; the More generally several observables can be considered extension to the reciprocity followed naturally (see also σ, ϕ , ϕ ,... and the notion of pattern can be accord- [55, 57]). In [21] the situation arising at really large fields, 1 2 ingly extended; with the same result that the ratio of the when the attractor is strictly smaller than the whole probability of a fluctuation pattern to that of the time re- phase space, is also discussed (eventually leading to the versed pattern is eτ σ + p+o(τ), to leading order as τ analysis in Sec.IX above). h i and in the precision, independent on the specification→ ∞of the fluctuations of ϕ1, ϕ2,.... Also the ϕ independence of Eq.(12.2) implies, given XII. FLUCTUATION PATTERNS two fluctuation patterns π for the observables σ, ϕ and 1 π′ for the observables σ, ψ, to leading order in ε, δ, τ − : The derivation of Onsager’s reciprocity for reversible Anosov systems with a time reversal map I smooth and τ,ε,δ τ,ε,δ P ( x π ) P ( x Iπ ) τ { ∼ } = τ { ∼ } (12.4) τ,ε,δ τ,ε,δ P ( x π ) P ( x Iπ ) τ { ∼ ′} τ { ∼ ′} 25i.e. as long as structural stability maintains the system an The above relations show that once the rare event of a Anosov system. sign change of the entropy production is realized then

14 15

the time reversed patterns have the same relative prob- with dimension of an inverse time, coinciding with the ability that they have when the entropy production has phase space total contraction rate. the opposite sign. In nonequilibrium situations the thermostats tempera- In other words to see that time reversed patterns oc- tures can be time dependent and also the force f as well cur it is “sufficient” to just change the sign of entropy as the volume of the container 0 can be time dependent. production (!): “no further efforts” are needed. The thermostats temperaturesC are fixed phenomenologi- In Sec.XI the Eq.(11.2) has been shown to be essen- cally and the mechanism of variation of the stirring forces tially equivalent to Onsager’s reciprocity and it is a spe- and of the geometric variation of the container shape or cial case of the general Eq.(12.3): therefore the above volume are more difficult to understand and to model Eq.(12.3) can be considered an extension of Onsager’s physically. reciprocity to stationary states of time reversible Anosov For instance the variation of the force f can be imag- systems or more generally (if σ+ is intended as the av- ined due to the varying speed of a paddle, rotating in the erage area contraction of the attracting surface ) to gas contained in 0, which in turn can be imagined to be C systems verifying the CH and the “axiom C”, see Sec.IXA controlled by a motor; but it is impossible to take into and caption to Fig.2. account, without a Daemon helping, how to keep con- trol of the direction and intensity of the collisions on the paddle. Hence assuming that the paddle has constant XIII. IRREVERSIBILITY TIME SCALE speed, or that it follows a given protocol of variation, is a phenomenological assumption. There are experimental setups in which a paddle, or The notion of “reversible transformation” between varying forces, are present and act on the particles in the equilibrium states is defined (often) to be an infinitely container . Or the external thermostats temperatures slow transformation through a sequence of equilibrium 0 and the volumeC of change following prescribed paths, states. The latter oxymoron is not really satisfactory:26 0 e.g. in the case ofC volume variations due to a moving it would be instead desirable to have a quantitative defini- piston. Invariably the entropy production is measured tion or, better, a way to associate with a transformation, via the amount of work that the motor and the forces defined by a given “protocol” leading from an equilibrium perform maintaining (or trying to maintain) the exter- state to another, a time scale Θ whose size indicates how nal force constant, or constraining it to follow a prefixed long it takes to realize that the process is irreversible. protocol, and via the heat ceded to the thermostats. Then a reversible transformation should be one with Here few cases will be considered in which the protocol Θ = (to be interpreted that irreversibility is impos- contemplates only variations of the external thermostats sible to∞ detect). If Θ < then it should be said that ∞ temperatures or of the volume of the containers. the evolution irreversible nature is revealed after time Θ Given the general interpretation of the entropy produc- which could be taken as the irreversibility time scale, [2, tion rate in terms of phase space volume variation, the Ch.5-11]. case of volume variation in the system of Fig.1 (Sec.IV) So let µ0 be the PDF of an equilibrium state and sup- can be treated phenomenologically by simply adding to pose that the protocol of action on the system is enforced V˙ Eq.(4.5) the quantity N V , which is the rate of variation by a change on the parameters on which the Hamiltonian N depends: like the temperature of an external thermostat, of the phase space volume V allowed to the N particles in . or the volume available to the molecules, in the case of C0 a gas enclosed in a container, or like the intensity of a Consider the system in Fig.1, Sec.IV, and express the volume force acting on an incompressible fluid. total phase space contraction per unit time, (4.5), as The protocol has a duration τ and remains constant Q˙ V˙ afterwards: during the time τ the system is no longer σ(x) σ (X˙ , X)= a N t U˙ (13.1) ≡ tot k T − V − in equilibrium: the latter is reached after the time τ Xa B a t elapsed and the system remains isolated or in contact with thermostats at the same temperature reaching the Let [0, τ] be the time during which a transformation 27 new equilibrium on a characteristic time scale τ ′. protocol Γ : t (T (t), V (t)) P (t) acts on an initial → a ≡ In the following the general system introduced in equilibrium state with SRB distribution µ0(dx) (e.g. a Sec.IV, see Fig.1, will be considered to fix ideas. The canonical “Gibbs distribution”). Then it is possible to entropy production is given by Eq.(4.5). It is a quantity define

(1) µt(dx) = µ0(S tdx), i.e. the distribution into which − µ0 evolves in time t under the flow generated in phase 26“A` la v´erit´e, les choses ne peuvent pas se passer rigoureuse- space by the equations of motion (remark that St is not ment comme nons l’avons suppos´e..., [59, p.13-14]. a group in t because the evolution is now time depen- 27Strictly speaking equilibrium will be reached after infinite dent). time; however it can be considered reached for practical pur- (2) the SRB distribution µsrb,t corresponding to the poses after τ ′, which has the meaning of a time scale. stationary distribution that corresponds to parameters

15 16

(Ta, V ) fixed (“frozen”) at their value at time t, P (t) = Another way of reading the above: the closer the actual (Ta(t), V (t)). entropy production σt is to the “ideal” σsrb,t the longer is (3) the “relative” phase space contraction the irreversibility time scale, i.e. the time beyond which the process cannot be considered reversible. def r(t) = (σ σ ) (13.2) t − srb,t Remark: particularly interesting are adiabatic processes where σsrb,t is the time average of the entropy production in which external forces vary remaining conservative: rate in the SRB distribution corresponding to the control (a) an example is an adiabatic expansion of a gas in a parameters P = (Ta, V ) frozen at time t, while σt is the piston. The irreversibility time scale can be evaluated average phase space contraction in the non stationary from the piston velocity, see [2, Ch.5]. 28 distribution µt(dx) evolved from µ0. (b) a second example is a rarefied gas, with mass m molecules in a fixed adiabatic container, subject to a force Assuming the chaotic hypothesis the approach to the of potential mgz. At time 0 the gas is in equilibrium at SRB states will be exponential: the state µt would evolve 1 temperature β− and the process G simply raises the ac- under the “frozen evolution” exponentially fast, on some 29 1 celeration g to g′ > g at time 0 and then decreases it time scale κ− to µsrb,t. Therefore the integral (with a 31 back to g after a time τ > 0 (or just stays g′ forever). inverse time dimension): Since σ 0 (by Liouville’s theorem) and σ 0 it is t ≡ srb,t ≡ 1 ∞ 2 Θ= : i.e. the transformation is reversible according to Θ(Γ)− = r(t) dt (13.3) ∞ Z0 the above proposal of reversibility time scale, as also sug- gested by Gibbs’ entropy constancy in Hamiltonian evo- will converge, provided the final values of the control pa- lutions (even when the Hamiltonian is time dependent). rameters are reached fast enough (e.g. in a finite time, as Nevertheless the cycle leads to an intermediate temper- in actual protocols which last a prefixed finite time). ature variation δT (with δT δg , up to finite volume The time scale of irreversibility of the protocol could T ≃ g be defined by Θ(Γ): the larger Θ is, the closer to a quasi corrections): an apparent disagreement with the inde- static one the transformation is, as suggested by the fol- pendence on the rapidity of the process, see Appendix C lowing remarks. for details. A physical definition of “quasi static” transformation protocol is a transformation that is “very slow” during its duration time τ. This can be translated mathematically XIV. CHAOS. STRUCTURE OF ANOSOV def SYSTEMS. THEIR DIGITAL CODES. into an evolution in which P (t) = (Ta(t), V (t)) evolves like, if not exactly, as Since the early works on Statistical Mechanics the con- εt cept of coarse graining played a major role in relating P (t)= P (0) + (1 e− )(P ( ) P (0)) (13.4) − ∞ − macroscopic and microscopic descriptions of mechanical with ε> 0 small. systems, [30]. An evolution Γ “close to quasi static”, but simpler Anosov systems, through the chaotic hypothesis, offer for computing Θ(Γ), would proceed changing P (0) into new perspectives. For simplicity here will be considered P ( ) = P (0)+∆ by τ/δ steps of size δ, each of which the case of a discrete time evolution via a map S on ∞ has a time duration tδ long enough so that, at the k-th a phase space M, which could be a Poincar´e’s section step, the evolving system closely settles onto its station- of either a macroscopic model of evolution (possibly infi- ary state P (0) + kδ. nite dimensional, like Navier-Stokes equation) or a micro- 30 κtδ 19 The tδ can be defined by e− κδ then by scopic one (like Newton’s equations for 10 molecules) Eq.(13.3): ≪ or a phenomenological model (like Lorenz96 or Lorenz63

1 1 2 1 models or GOY shell model). Θ(Γ)− const κ− (σ′δ) log(κδ)− (13.5) ≃ What follows can be extended to the case of Anosov flows, [16, 56], essentially by reduction of the problem where σ′ is an estimate of ∂tσsrb,t. Therefore the “slower” 1 to the Anosov maps case by replacing the flow with a is the protocol Γ (i.e. the larger the time scale δ− is) the closer to is the irresversibility scale Θ(Γ). Poincar´e’s map between timed events (i.e. by fixing a ∞ surface in phase space and studying the return map to it). Extension to axiom A maps or flows is also possible, [16, 61, 62]. 28The two terms in Eq.(13.1) have in general different depen- The discussion below is necessarily somewhat technical dence on particles number N: as of O(N) in the case of volume as it tries to convey the reason why Anosov maps lead to 2 variations or O(N 3 ) if P (t) only involves boundary tempera- ture variations (hence the heat exchange is a boundary effect). 29Supposed to be the same for all t, for simplicity. 30 31 Remark that the variation of σ σkδ,+ is, in general, This means that the initial potential energy is mgNh0, where (k+1)δ,+ − of order κδ as a consequence of the differentiability, [60], of h0 is the height of the center of mass, and varies at time 0 to ′ the SRB states with respect to the parameters. mg Nh0.

16 17

stationary states which can be identified with equilibria Such pavements = (P0,...,Pn) of M are called of one dimensional spin chains with short range inter- Markovian partitionsP if the maximum diameter of the actions: the extreme simplicity of Anosov maps will be Pi’s is so small that the intersection between S±Pi and 32 manifest after understanding the formalism. It will re- Pj is a connected set: as inthe figure. ward the necessary time, thus providing strong support The hyperbolicity of S implies existence of Markovian to the statement (see Sec.I) that Anosov maps play, for partitions and they can be constructed iteratively, [11, chaotic systems, a role parallel to that of the harmonic 15, 61, 63]. oscillators for ordered dynamics. The elements of are called “rectangles” as they have A main feature of Anosov maps is that the stable and boundaries formedP by portions of stable and unstable unstable manifolds of each point x are smooth mani- manifolds which in the case of the simplest Anosov maps, folds which depend “almost” differentiably on x (they i.e. algebraic hyperbolic maps of the 2-dimensional torus, are H¨older continuous and the H¨older exponent can be are really quadrilaterals with opposite sides parallel and taken as close to 1 as wished, paying the price of a larger equal: algrebraic means that the maps are defined by a H¨older constant). The manifolds can be used to build constant matrix with integer entries, no eigenvalue with “cells” in M enclosed within boundaries which are unions 0 1 modulus 1 and determinant 1 (like ). of subsets of stable or unstable manifolds. ±  1 1  The key remark, [14, 15], is that the phase space M In dimension 2, in general, they have the aspect of can be paved with cells, = (P1,...,PN ), which are deformed rectangles (as the manifolds constituting their connected sets, closures ofP their interiors, and are either boundaries are neither parallel nor flat) with smooth pairwise disjoint or have only common boundary points; boundaries. If the map S is an algbraic map of the 2- furthermore are “covariant” if transformed by the map torus (i.e. S is a 2 2 matrix with integer entries) they S in the following sense: are rectangles, in the× literal sense. In 3 dimensions the intersections between the sta- (1) the boundary ∂P of P has the form ∂ P ∂ P j j u j s j ble manifolds≥ and the unstable manifolds meeting at the with ∂ P consisting of surface elements which are∪ unions u j edges of the rectangle are not smooth: in general a por- of portions of unstable manifolds and ∂ P consisting of s j tion of unstable manifold of dimension u> 1, contained surface elements unions of portions stable manifolds: call in ∂P , may have a boundary33 which does not contain ∂ = ∂ P and ∂ = ∂ P . i u j u j s j s j a smooth surface of dimension u 1 (e.g. in dimension 3 (2)P the∪ images S 1P Pof the∪ cell P will have bound- ± j j and if the unstable manifold had− dimension 2 it does not ary still consisting of stable or unstable surface elements contain a differentiable arc, as one might naively imagine, (because images of stable or unstable manifolds are still [64]: i.e. the edge is not a smooth line). stable or unstable manifolds) and, furthermore, will have Likewise a portion of stable manifold, of dimension s> the covariance property, see Fig.3: 1, contained in ∂Pi, may have a boundary which does 1 S∂sPj ∂s , S− ∂uPj ∂u (14.1) not contain a smooth surface of dimension s 1. So ⊂ P ⊂ P the rectangles edges may be quite rugged. Nevertheless− 1 This means that the Pj are so deformed by S (resp. S− ) the boundaries of the sets Pi can be shown to have zero that no new stable (resp. unstable) boundaries are cre- volume. ated. Furthermore the points x in their evolution will Given a point x M its history σ = (σk)k∞= , σk = never end up on any of the cells boundaries with the ex- ∈ −∞ i 1, 2,...,n, on a Markovian partition is defined by ception of a set of zero volume (i.e. the set i∞= S ∂ ). P ∪ −∞ P (3) the ∂u , ∂s have 0 volume Skx P , k ( , ) (14.2) P P ∈ σk ∀ ∈ −∞ ∞ uniquely with the exception of the set, with zero volume k in M, of the points x ∞ S ∂ , i.e. except the set of points which in their∈ evolution ∪−∞ P fall on the boundary of some of the P . The history is a digital code for i ∈ P Fig.3: Very symbolically, as 2-dimensional squares, a few el- the points of M and the labels k can, naturally, be called ements of are shown as an array of squares. An element “times”. P Pi (shaded, left) of is transformed by S into SPi (shaded, The history is very convenient as it transforms the evo- P right) in such a way that the part of the boundary that con- lution x Sx into the simple “translation”: if x has → tracts ends up exactly on a boundary of some element among history σ = σi i∞= and x evolves into Sx then its { } −∞ P1, P2,...,Pn. A similar figure with horizontal and vertical history σ evolves into τσ = σi+1 i∞= . { } −∞ lines exchanged would illustate the action of S−1. Obviously if is a pavement of M with the above prop- P erties (1),(2) then also the pavement whose elements are 32Disconnected intersections may happen if the maximum di- P = SP P has the same properties: hence the hyper- −1 i,j i ∩ j ameter of the Pi can be dilated by the action of S or S to bolicity of the map yields that there exist pavements with become larger than the diameter of M. 33 elements with diameter smaller than a prefixed ε> 0. i.e. the intersection with the stable manifolds in ∂Pi.

17 18

Define the n n “transitivity matrix” Tσ,σ′ = 1 if Given a Anosov map S, its phase space M can be there is an interior× point x P whose image Sx is an thought as the space of states of a spin system on a ∈ σ interior point of P ′ and T ′ = 0 otherwise. Then only 1-dimensional lattice: evolution of x M being just σ σ,σ ∈ sequences σ with Tσk,σk+1 1, that will be called “ - the shift of the history σ on a Markovian partition compatible”, can arise as histories≡ of points. P = (P , P ,...,P ), see Sec.XIV, into which x is coded. P 1 2 m Viceversa given any -compatible history σ there is at Therefore points of M are still digitally represented al- least one x M whoseP history is σ and the correspon- though the usual digital sequences for their Cartesian co- dence x σ∈ is one-to-one with the exception of points ordinates) are abandoned. x in the←→ above mentioned zero volume set Si∂ . This ∪i P Remark: Representation via histories on Markovian par- geometric property follows from hyperbolicity and the titions in not universal, like the the one via the digits of covariance of the boundaries of , [2]. The history σ de- P the cartesian coordinates, but is specifically adapted to termines the corresponding point x “exponentially fast”, the particular dynamical system (M,S). meaning that there is a constant κ > 0 such that the n κn The normalized volume is then coded into a probability σi i= n determines x within const e− (and κ can be { } − taken any smaller than the minimum of the expansion distribution µvol(dσ) on the space C(Z) of compatible 1 rates for S and S− ). strings. In the language of Statistical Mechanics, it would be an “Ising model”, in which the σ’s can be regarded as In Anosov maps there are points with a dense trajec- 35 2 sequences of spins, so that the time label i of σ σ tory (see in Sec.I): hence the compatibility matrix T is i ∈ K becomes the location of the spin on a (one dimensional) “transitive”, i.e. there is K > 0 such that T ′ 1 for σ,σ ≥ lattice. all pairs σ, σ : this means that among compatible histo- ′ The µ can be contructed via a function Φ, called ries it is possible that any symbol σ is followed by any vol “potential”, defined for all integers a b on the finite other symbol σ′ after at most K steps. ≤ strings σ = σa,...,σb C([a,b]) that are compatible The symbolic history can, therefore be used to code the (i.e. that are{ restrictions} to ∈ [a,b] of a string in C(Z). The distributions µ0(dx) = ρ(x)dx, with density ρ(x) with Φ has the “short range” property, i.e. Φ[a,b](σ) tends to respect to the volume element dx in M, into stochastic 0 exponentially if b a and uniformly in a as processes, i.e. into probability distributions on the space − → ∞ of the compatible histories.34 κ b a Φ = sup Φ[a,b](σ) e | − | < (15.1) || || a | | ∞ Xb a σ CX([a,b]) ≥ ∈ XV. VOLUME AS STOCHASTIC PROCESS. for some κ> 0: at fixed time a the potential Φ is expo- SRB AS ISING SPIN CHAIN EQUILIBRIUM nentially localized at time a. The potential Φ will attribute to spin configurations The key to the theory of Anosov maps is the represen- σ C([ τ, τ]), an “energy”: ∈ − tation of the volume measure as a probability distribution on the set of compatible sequences, i.e. as a stochas- U(σ, τ)= ΦB(σB) (15.2) tic process, which in the above case has been proved B X[ τ,τ] ⊂ − to be a “Gibbs process” with a short range potential, which however, in general, is not translation invariant, where σB is the part of σ with time labels in the interval B and the summation is over the intervals B in [ τ, τ]. [14, 15, 65], see below. A connection with the Gibbs − processes emerges naturally also when attempting to in- The basic property concerns the set of x’s whose his- terpret results of simulations, [21, Sec.3],[6, 7]. tory σ restricted to i Λ = [ ℓ,ℓ] coincides with a given σ C(Λ): by the∈ definition− of history of x this set Λ ∈ is simply Pσ = k ΛPσk . Fixed σΛ C(Λ) the nor- Λ ∩ ∈ ∈ malized volume µvol(PσΛ ) is expressed in terms of the 34The code that associates with x M the history σ of x is potential Φ as: closely related to the “structural∈ stability” of Anosov maps. Λ U(σ,τ) Structural stability of Anosov maps means that if an Anosov σ C([ τ,τ]) e µvol(Pσ ) = lim ∈ − (15.3) map S is smoothly perturbed to become a map Sε, as a func- Λ τ P eU(σ,τ) tion of a parameter ε, with S = S then, if ε is small enough, →∞ σ C([ τ,τ]) 0 P ∈ − also Sε is an Anosov map and Sε is conjugated to S in the where the superscript Λ restricts the sum in the numer- sense that there is a H¨older continuous homeomorphism Θ of −1 ator to the configurations σ coinciding with σΛ in the M such that Sε =Θ S0 Θ . An essential step to prove this property is to show that a sites of Λ. Markovian partition for S can be deformed “by continuity” P into a Markovian partition ε for Sε with the same transition matrix: so that the conjugationP is the map x x′ associating ←→ 35 pairs with the same histories: under S0 on and under Sε Here a spin is a variable that can assume a finite number of P on ε. values, e.g. σ = 1 or σ = 1, 2, .., m. P ±

18 19

The Φ is a suitable potential, expressible in terms of up to a correction Ψ′(σ, τ) with Ψ′ a potential with the representation of the expansion and contraction rates the same properties as Ψ in Eq.(15.5), hence up to a at the point x coded into σ, [2, 14, 15]. τ-independent constant. Eq.(15.3) can be fairly easily checked in systems of di- (2) Eq.(15.6) is a function which has average towards the mension 2 (particularly if S is an algebraic map of the future equal to τσ+ with σ+ being the SRB average of torus, see also [63]) because the description, see Sec.XIV, the single step phase space contraction log det ∂ S x . − | i j | of the Markovian partition can be well visualized via ge- Eq.(15.6) says that the r.h.s. U (σ−, τ)+ U+(σ−, τ) τ − −i ometric drawings, see Fig.3 Sec.XIV, but requires some and be used to replace i= τ σ(S x) up to a correction effort in higher dimension, [61]. bounded by a τ independentP − constant. Furthermore the potential Φ tends asymptotically to (3) A second byproduct, see Eq.3.8.5, Eq.3.11.2 in [2],is become Φ+ to the right of the origin but it becomes µ (P ) −τ asymptotically Φ− to the left and Φ± are translationally srb σ τσ[−τ,0](S x)+... 36 = e− (15.7) invariant. This means: µvol(Pσ)

θ where the dots indicate a correction which is bounded κ( B +d(0,B)) by a τ-independent constant: this gives details about the Φ (σ ) Φ±(σ ) e | | , θ = (15.4) | B B − B B | ± singularity of the SRB distribution with respect to the XB XσB volume. where B are intervals [a,b] to the right of the origin if Φ+ Φ θ = + or to the left if θ = (respectively) and d(0,B) Existence of , − is behind the theorem on Anosov is the distance of B to the origin.− maps, [14, 15, 65], stating that the SRB distribution µsrb can be naturally represented as a PDF on the set of Hence, if σ = (σ τ ,...,στ ) = (σ , σ+), with σ = 0 − τ − − compatible sequences associated with a Markovian pave- σk k= τ and σ+ = σk k=1, U(σ) can be split as { } − { } ment (any one, as there are infinitely many of them to choose).P From the general theory of the one-dimensional U(σ, τ)= U (σ , τ)+ U+(σ+, τ)+ Ψ(σ, τ) (15.5) Gibbs states, and from Eq.(15.3), it can be read: − − Φ Φ+ where U (σ±, τ)= ΦB±(σB) and Ψ(σ, τ) can (a) the SRB is given by Eq.(15.3) with = , ± B [0, τ] be expressed in termsP of⊂ a± potential Ψ which satisfies a (b) the volume distribution has the form in Eq.(15.3) Φ Φ± bound like Eq.(15.1) with ΨB = 0 unless B contains at with in general = , and 6 1 least one of the three sites τ, 0: in other words Ψ is a (c) the SRB distribution for the backward evolution, S− , ± suitable interpolation between Φ± and Φ. is given by Eq.(15.3) with Φ = Φ−: (a),(b),(c) together The limit Eq.(15.3) exists as a consequence of the 1- imply the theorem of Sec.I. dimensionality of the σ’s, of the short range of Φ±, Φ and (d) the phase space contraction σ(x) is expressed in terms of the absence of phase transitions in stochastic processes of the symbolic history σ of x and of the potentials Φ± with such potentials: the usual SM analysis is presented via Eq.(15.6). This is the key to derive the FT. only for the case of translation invariant potentials, [40, With the above “Ising model interpretation” of the Sec.5.8], but it works, essentially word-by-word, also for phase space volume, the short range nature of the po- Φ + non translation invariant potentials like the above ’s. tentials Φ, Φ−, Φ and the 1-dimensionality of the time The proof of the Eq.(15.3) is technical, [15],[14]: in (i.e. of the labels of the strings σ) imply, from a SM view- heuristic form can be found in Ch.3 of [2] where it is dis- point and as a theorem, that the volume distribution is cussed together with several important corollaries which a simple stochastic process with very strong ergodicity are summarized in the following remarks, see also Ch.6 properties. in [11]. Therefore a randomly chosen point x (except for a set of x in a set with zero volume) will have a well defined Remarks (1) As a byproduct of the proof of Eq.(15.3) statistics, the SRB statistics, such that Stx is coded into an interesting expression for the phase space contraction σ + a string t = σi+t which, for t > 0 and large, is a emerges. Let x be selected in Pσ with σ = (σ−, σ ) typical string for{ the} process with the “future potential” (as above), then the logarithm of the total phase space Φ+ τ , while for t < 0 and large is a typical string for the contraction in the interval [ τ, 0] at y = S− x can be − process with the “past potential” Φ−. expressed by With probability 1, with respect to the volume mea- def τ sure, or to any one which has a density with respect to τσt[ τ,0](y) = log det ∂iSj (y) − − | | (15.6) the volume, a point x will generate a well defined SRB = U (σ−, τ)+ U+(σ−, τ) statistics, in general different for the evolution S towards − − 1 the future or for the evolution S− towards the past. This explains why in general the SRB distribution for S and 1 that for S− are singular with respect to each other and 36 ± If B = [a,b] and B + t = [a + t,b + t] then ΦB+t(σB ) to the volume. ± ≡ ΦB (σB ) for all t. The result can be suitably adapted to Anosov flows

19 20

and also extended to more general maps or flows, called with a nonequilibrium stationary state, and if it even Axiom A maps or flows, [16, 56]. admits an extension to the evolution towards stationary The structure of Anosov systems as a stochastic pro- states which plays the role of a Lyapunov function. cess with potential Φ is basic in the derivation of the Going back to the origin of the ergodic hypothesis fluctuation relation in Sec.VI ; it also indicates a urgent imagine the phase space compatible with the constraints problem: namely that what said so far might be simply as a discrete set of points located in the usual continuum insufficient to define a local phase entropy production phase space. and to formulate a local fluctuation relation dealing with This is tempting as it would bring back the idea that a some of the fluctuations taking place in a small region. phase space point wanders visiting successively all other The problem is interesting as the fluctuations of the points: it would explain the existence of a unique station- phase space contraction, just because of its physical ary distribution, to be therefore, identified with the SRB meaning, will be often macroscopic quantities which, distribution, which would be simply the distribution giv- therefore, will be difficult to observe in measurements.37 ing equal weight to all points, whether in isolated systems Nevertheless there is some relation that can be estab- (i.e. Hamiltonian evolutions) or in systems out of equi- lished between the latter problem and the structure of librium (i.e. under the action of non conservative forces the just described global SRB distributions, and it indi- and thermostats): thus a unification of the equilibrium cates that a fluctuation relation valid for locally observed and nonequilibrium phenomena would be achieved. fluctuations (i.e. observed in small regions compared to To discuss the latter question consider a chaotic system the system size) might be possible:38: more details are defined by a map on a manifold M (and satisfying the deferred to Appendix B. CH). Form a Markovian partition of the continuum phase P space of a system into finitely many “cells” Pi and call XVI. ENTROPY ? STATIONARITY & µsrb(Pi) the SRB probability of each set, i.e. the fre- APPROACH TO IT quency of visit to Pi from a randomly chosen initial data. µsrb(Pi) is well defined although singular, i.e. not ex- Boltzmann’s H-theorem for rarefied gases led to pressible in general via an integral over Pi of a density the general definition of equilibrium entropy as S = function: hence it is different from the volume µvol(Pi) of Pi. Then replace the continuum phase space by a finite kB log W , as written by Planck, where W is the vol- ume of phase space where the equilibrium distribution number of points 0, with 0µsrb(Pi) of them in each P . N N is concentrated. In the H-theorem S is the limit value of i ∈P the more general H-function, defined even for a nonequi- The evolution should be a one cycle permutation of the librium distribution of a rarefied gas, which reaches its phase space points: in this way each cell Pi is visited, in maximum S on the equilibrium state. a very long time, with a frequency which is, therefore, Therefore H can be regarded as an extension to uniquely determined and is a representation of the SRB nonequilibrium evolutions (of rarefied gases not in equi- distribution, at least for the computation of the averages librium, but isolated and evolving towards equilibrium) of observables whose variations in the cells Pi can be con- with the main feature that it is a “Lyapunov function” sidered negligible. The time necessary might even be not varying with time and approaching (monotonically) a be too long if the cells Pi are not too small and contain maximum value, namely the equilibrium entropy. a order 1 fraction of the total number of (discretized) points. Recently the Boltzmann’s formula S = kB log W has been extended to general evolutions towards equilibrium, But in the case of nonequilibrium the equations of mo- [67], defining appropriately the volume W as the volume tion are no longer Hamiltonian, and are dissipative. This means that, in general, the divergence σ of the equa- in phase space of the macrostate associated with the ini- − tial microscopic state, determined by a local a coarse tions of motion is not 0 (as it is for the isolated evolutions, grained empirical density and by the total energy (ini- i.e. in the Hamiltonian cases) and must have a non nega- tive average σ 0.39 If σ > 0 this means that motion tial data consisting of single (typical) phase space points h i≥ h i and for a dense gas), and showing that the new quantity evolves towards an attracting set which has zero volume: it can be imagined (by CH) dense on a smooth surface appears to increase monotonically in time (towards an A equilibrium state). of dimension lower than that of phase space and initial This is different from a natural question arising here: data x starting out of it evolve in time with their distance to tending to 0 exponentially fast. namely whether an entropy function can be associated A A discretization of phase space should therefore be a discrete representation of the attracting set . Under the A

37Very large fluctuations can hint at “violations” of the second principle, [35], hence cannot be observed in large systems. 38The importance of the problem is made obvious by a few 39The average σ cannot be < 0, i.e. phase space cannot keep recent experimental works, e.g. [37, 66] expanding foreverh i if a stationary state can be reached, [29].

20 21

chaotic hypothesis heuristic arguments can be developed σ > 0, via σ and the smallest non zero Lyapunov ex- to estimate the number of discrete points necessary to ponent,h i excepth i when σ = 0, [29]). This provides some give an accurate descriptionN of the motions of data on evidence that S is noth definedi just up to an additive con- the attracting set , [2, Ch.3.11]. stant. A The points on which the dynamics develops can be This is in sharp contrast with the equilibrium result obtained by covering phase space with a uniform lattice (in which σ = 0) where changing the precision changes with meshes δp,δq in momentum and position and repre- log by ah constanti independent of the particular equilib- senting the dynamics as a map on the discrete set of riumN state studied. And, although the derivation of the N0 points so obtained: then select 0 of them which estimate is heuristic (and is an inequality), it seems to are recurrent; such points exist,N having ≤ N supposed that indicate that entropy, as a function of state, might not the motion can be represented on a regular discrete lat- be definable for stationary states out of equilibrium, [2, tice and the SRB is ergodic. Here one should have in Sec.3.10,3.11]. mind the numerical simulations of chaotic dynamical sys- Nevertheless one of the main features of the extension tems: there the evolution is literally simulated as a map of entropy, as S = kB log W , to rarefied gases not in equi- (“code”) of a discrete set of points, digitally represented librium but isolated and evolving towards equilibrium, is and regularly spaced. that it is a “Lyapunov function” varying with time and Then it is natural to try to define entropy of the SRB approaching (monotonically) a maximum value as a limit state the quantity S = k log . A heuristic estimate of value, namely the equilibrium entropy, [67]. B N , under the CH, has been proposed in [2, Ch3.11] as It is conceivable that also in the evolution to a sta- N sketched below. tionary state it could be possible to define a Lyapunov n First refine the Markovian partition = Pσ σ=1 into function with the same property of evolving (possibly τ k P { } = τ S , i.e. define the partition whose elements not monotonically) to a maximum which is reached at P ∨− P τ have the form i= τ Pσi = Pσ, choosing τ so large that stationarity, [2, Ch3.11], as briefly discussed below. theb size of each∩ element− is so small that the few observ- Consider as an initial non stationary distribution a ables of interest have a constant value in each P = Pσ. delta function on a single point in phase space, for sim- λτ Therefore choose τ so that e− δ = δ′ where δ is the plicity. Then the fraction P (ξ,t) of times that the point b 1 maximal linear dimension of the P , δ′ is the max- ξ is visited tends to , as prescribed by the SRB ∈ P ∈ A N imal linear dimension of P and λ is the minimum distribution in the above discrete representation, where Lyapunov exponent of S: thus∈ τPdepends on the precision is the number of points in . Therefore: 1 δ 40 b b N A τ = λ− log δ′ . Let be the number of the points on the attractor S(t)= kB P (ξ,t) log P (ξ,t) N − and be the number of points in the regular lattice Xξ N0 (16.3) over which the dynamics is discretized: then in a cell Pσ 1 1 t + S = kB log = kB log the numbers of points will be respectively µsrb(Pσ) −−−−→→ ∞ ∞ − N N Xξ and 0µvol((Pσ)). N N ThereforeN a simple estimate, [2], of the number points Hence S is the maximum value that S(t) can reach: so of the uniform lattice that must be recurrent to guarantee that S(t∞) can play the role of a Lyapunov function. a “faithful” discrete representation of the dynamics over a time τ is Although S depends non trivially on the precision of the discretisation∞ used still, for all choices of the dis- µsrb(Pσ) cretisation, the S(t) will have the property of evolving to 0 min (16.1) reach (however not necessarily monotonically) the maxi- N ≤ N σ µvol(Pσ) mum value on the SRB distribution, i.e. on the natural where the minimum is over the histories σ C([ τ, τ]). stationary state. Entropy might be not defined in general σ τ ∈ − The Eq.(15.7) leads to: 0e−h i with σ equal stationary states, as a function of state, although in the to the SRB average of theN phase ≤ N space contractionh i σ(x). approach to stationarity it could be a Lyapunov function Hence: (not unique) extending the equilibrium entropy function, [2, Sec.3.12]. σ δ S = kB log kB (log 0 h i log ) (16.2) N ≤ N − λ δ′ and changing the precision of the observations, i.e. XVII. VISCOUS FLUIDS AND REVERSIBILITY changing the observables determining δ′, S changes by a quantity which depends on the SRB distribution, if The analysis of the previous sections deal essentially with systems of particles and leaves out the important class of stationary distributions that arise in systems nor- mally described via PDE’s, but often can be also de- 40The CH implies that there is no vanishing exponent for the scribed by properties of assemblies of microscopic parti- map. cles, via suitable scaling limits, [68].

21 22

This suggests that it should be possible to apply the which is called enstrophy, controls statistical properties same ideas to macroscopic systems, like fluids. Of course of the flow through its average. Therefore a first proposal 1 the theory of chaos was developed precisely for such sys- is to replace the viscosity R with a multiplier such that tems, [17–19, 69]: however, if systems like fluids are con- ∂t (u) 0. This leads immediately to sidered, the reversibility is usually lost in the macroscopic D ≡ descriptions. u˙ + (u ∂)u = α(u)∆u + f ∂p , ∂ u =0 Yet friction, responsible for the loss of reversibility, is · − · a phenomenological notion and it can be thought that k2f u (17.3) u k k k αe( )= e 4 ·e 2 e e e e the same systems could admit equivalent descriptions via P k uk k=0 | | other equations, possibly even reversible. P 6 A key might be the theory of “ensembles” for station- in space dimension d = 2. The equation is reversible for ary non equilibrium states, following the proposals con- the time reversal map Iu = u and will be called RNS.43 sidered in Sec.VII - IX. An attempt in this direction is − presented now focusing attention on the incompressible Let N be a cut-off and consider the evolutions for INS and RNS above in d = 2 for simplicity. Then the evolu- Navier-Stokes fluids. A first step is to propose, via the ⊥ k example of the NS equations, that the stationary states tion equation for uk = i k uk are | | of macroscopic systems that are scaling limits derived from microscopic molecular evolutions can be described, 2 2 in suitable circumstances, by reversible equations, and (k1⊥ k2)(k2 k1) u˙ k = · − uk1 uk2 equally well. − 2 k1 k2 k k +Xk =k (17.4) In the case of the NS equations the proposal goes back, 1 2 | | | | | | 2 β k uk + fk, k , k , k N in a related context, to [42] and, in the form proposed − | 2| | 2| | |≤ below, to works summarized in [2]: it appeared already in [1, 21, 52, 70–74]. 1 where β = R in the case of INS and β = α(u) in the case The classical NS equation in dimension d =2, 3, for a of RNS and in both cases uk = 0 for k >N or k = 0. ik x | | | | | | velocity u(x)= k=0 e− · uk, with periodic boundary The size of the parameter R controls the stability of 6 conditions in [0,P2π]d, is the evolution: for simplicity it will be supposed that if R is large enough then all initial data, with the exception of u˙ + (u ∂)u = ν∆u + f ∂p , ∂ u = 0 (17.1) a set of zero volume, evolve towards a unique attracting · − · set and define a unique stationary distribution at least if N is not too small. wheree the externale forcinge f is supposed to be concen- trated on the large scale Fourier components, actually it The stationary distributions of the two equations will will be supposed to have only one Fourier’s component be parameterized by R for INS and by D, the constant 1 41 value of the enstrophy. And the question will be whether f k with f k = and k0 = (2, 1), to fix ideas. ± 0 | ± 0 | √2 − there is a correspondence R D which associates distri- The equation is not reversible for the time reversal map butions which are “equivalent”,←→ i.e. assign equal averages Iu = u and will be called INS.42 − to suitable classes of observables. In the above dimensionless form the viscosity is writ- 1 ten ν = R , where R is usually called “Grashof’s number”. Remarks: (1) It is well known that at fixed N it is not The viscosity is a phenomenological notion derived from true that there is a unique stationary distribution at reversible microscopic equations of motion, [41], and it given R or D: at small R (e.g. R < 60) by direct cal- 1 is possible to think that the coefficient R could be re- culations by and accurate simulations this is shown. In placed by a Lagrange multiplier designed to hold con- [76–81] the phenomenon of “hysteresis”, i.e. coexistence stant a property characteristic of the flow. of several attracting sets, is discussed in detail. // (2) 1 One of the reasons behind the phenomenon (but by no The dissipation per unit time is ν (u) R (u) with: D ≡ D means the only one) is the “gauge” symmetry of the NS 1 equations: if there is a such that k a = 0 for all k for u ∂u 2 x k2 2 · ik a ( )= 2 ( ) d = uk (17.2) which fk = 0, then if uk is a solution also e · uk is a so- D (2π) Z | | ⊥ kX=0 6 iγ iθ0k k 6 lution. Hence if fk = cδk, k e± , c R also uke · 0 ± 0 ∈ e is a solution: for each θ0 an invariant set of data is then defined. (3) In the several cases some (or all) of the invariant sets 41More generally the forcing can be supposed to have fk = 0 only for k < F , with F being a fixed cut-off. The cases6 k = (0, |1)| and k =( 1, 0) are somewhat trivial, see [75]. 42Viscosity± plays the role± of a model of thermostat: the fluid keeps a constant temperature in spite of the viscosity: there- 43In dimension d = 3: α = α(u) has to be modified by adding 2 to the numerator of Eq.(17.3) be quantity (k1 + k2) fore viscosity is a model for the undisclosed mechanism keep- k1,k2 ing the temperature constant. (u i k2)(uk +k uk ). P k1 · 1 2 · 2

22 e e 23

44 may be stable and several stationary states will coexist. W (u)= k fku k: where W is the work done per unit − (4) Symmetry, or more generally existence of more than time by theP external force f. one attracting surface, divides the stationary distribu- Hence since W is a local observable, as fk has been tions into equivalence classes: and the particular station- supposed such, the average of W , which will be called ary distribution that is reached starting from a given ini- W a for a = (rev,N), (irr, N) respectively, has to be the tial data u may depend on u, see remark (iv) in Sec.VI. same in equivalent stationary states if N , i.e. : In these instances equivalence may be difficult to check. → ∞ irr,N irr,N rev,N rev,N Unless for all data u, aside a set of zero volume, the sta- W νµ (D), W µ (α)En (17.7) ≡ R ≡ D tionary distribution is unique and we are interested only ˙ in generic behavior in the space of velocity fields u with because the average of E has to vanish. Hence the equiv- alence condition µirr,N ( )= D immediately implies: complex components. R D (5) The simplification of uniqueness of the attracting set rev,N (on which the CH holds) that will be used below means RµD (α) N 1 (17.8) −−−−→→∞ that all invariant sets, except one, become unstable at which becomes a key preliminary test of the conjecture large R. when initial data are randomly chosen and the evolution (6) In the following we shall proceed under the above has a unique stationary state. uniqueness assumption. However this is not essential: if And the equivalence condition, if the conjecture holds, there are several possible attracting sets then they will receives the interpretation that the average work done by have to be distinguished by labels γ and the stationary the forcing and dissipated per unit time is the same in distributions will be parameterized by the labels: equiv- the two evolutions. alence becomes in this case the existence for both equa- In the cases in which there are several attracting sets, tions of an equal number of attracting sets and all pa- hence several SRB distributions, the conjecture has to rameters determining them can be put in correspondence be modified (see remarks (iv) in Sec.VI and (6) above) so that the corresponding stationary distributions assign simply by saying that if γ,γ are labels distinguishing the the same averages to the local observables. ′ extremal distributions in irr,N , rev,N , with a given R irr,N rev,N and the corresponding D, thenE a correspondenceE between Call St ,St the evolutions generated on the phase space (of dimension 4N(N + 1) if d = 2) by the γ and γ′ is eventually, for N large enough, possible so two equations. The SRB distributions will be param- that Eq.(17.8) holds. eterized respectively by R,N or by D,N where D = If holding, the conjecture would establish a strong def 2 2 analogy between, on one hand, the theory of the ther- (u) = k uk is the (constant) enstrophy and con- D k | | modynamic limit of the canonical and microcanonical stitute elementsP of the “ensembles” irr,N and rev,N E irr,NE equilibrium ensembles and, on the other hand, the above respectively, whose elements will be denoted µν and rev,N proposed equivalence of ensembles of SRB distributions µD , respectively. for the INS and RNS equations. The irr,N is analogous The discussion in Sec.VII-IX suggests considering the E 1 to the canonical ensemble with ν = R− corresponding two collections of SRB distributions and estabilsh a cor- to k T and rev,N is analogous to the microcanonical irr,N irr,N rev,N B E respondence between µR and µD ensemble with D, the enstrophy, corresponding to the en- rev,N by, see∼ Eq.(17.2), ∈ E ∈ E ergy. The observables O play the role of the local observ- ables and their localization in momentum corresponds to irr,N rev,N irr,N µ µ if µ ( )= D, (17.5) the localization in space in the thermodynamical equilib- R ∼ D R D rium ensembles. Conjecture: If O(u) is a “local” observable, in the sense The above conjecture can be tested and some tests are that O depends only on the components uk with k

23 24

960 modes for a long time to obtain the average value D uation would require substantially larger computation

for the enstrophy: this realizes the equivalence condi- time), [82, 83].

✁

☞ ✌ ✌ ✆ ☞ ✍ ✎ ✁

tion Eq.(17.5). Then the conjecture would predict that ✂

☞ ✌ ✌ ☞ ✍ ✎

✂ ✂ ✁

in reversible evolution, run from an initial data with en- ✂ ✄☎ 1

strophy D, the average of α(u) should be R . The first ✂

simulations yields Fig.4.

✆

✄☎

✁

✠ ✡ ☛ ☞ ✠ ☛ ✌ ☎

✆ ✞ ✞ ✆ ✟ ✂ ✆ ✆ ✞

✆

✠ ✡ ☛ ☞ ✠ ☛ ✌ ☎

✞ ✞ ✞ ✆ ✟ ✂ ✆ ✆ ✞

✠ ✡ ☛ ☞ ✠ ☛ ✌ ✍ ✎✍ ✏✑ ☎

✞ ✞ ✞ ✆ ✟ ✂ ✆ ✆ ✞ ✝ ✆

✂

✞

✆

✄ ☎

✄

✂

☎

✂ ✄ ☎

✆

✁

✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆

✂ ✁ ✝ ✞ ☎ ✟ ✠ ✡ ☛ ✂

☎

−1 ✄ Fig.5:The local, over a time step 4h , Lyapunov spectra for

960 modes truncation: reversible and irreversible superposed. ✂

The sum of the (local) exponents in Fig.4 is < 0.

✁

☎ ☎

✝ ✆ ✆ ✞ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✞✝ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✝ ✆ ✆ ✟ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✟✝ ✆ ✆ The two spectra look quite identical: and the rel- Fig.4:Reversible evolution NS : running average of the “re- rev rev ative difference of corresponding exponents ( λi 2Re(f u )k2 −k0 k0 0 irr rev irr | − versible friction” Rα(u) R k4 2 , superposed to λi /max( λi , λi ) is perhaps more informative:

Pk |uk| ✁ ✞

≡ | | | | |

☛ ☞ ✂✌ ✞ ✂ ✂ ✂ ✂☛ ✍ ✂ ✎

✆ ✡ ✟ ☎

the conjectured value 1 and to the fluctuating values Rα(u):

✁ ✝

R=2048, 960 modes, λ = max. Lyapunov exp. 1.5, in- ✁ ✝ max −17 ≃

tegration step h = 2 , x-axis time unit 4h, forcing fk = 0

✁ ✆ ±iπ/3 except f±(2,−1) = e /√2; hence time unit in abscissa cor-

responds to 219 integration steps: data are plotted by lines at

✁

☎

such time intervals. Superposed also to the running average of ✁ ✄ Rα(u) in the equivalent irreversible NS eq. The two running

averages and the line 1 are not easy to distinguish on the scale ✁ ✂

of the drawing.

✂ ✄ ✝ ✞ ✂

☎ ✆ ✟ ✠ ✡ A daring test, which goes beyond the conjecture, deals with the equivalence of the exponents of the Jacobian Fig.6: Relative difference betweeen (local) Lyapunov exponents matrix evaluated in the two equations under the equiv- in the previous Fig.5; R=2048, 960 modes. The bar marks the alence conditions: the result for the same truncation of 5% discrepancy, and the lines are visual aids. the equations (960 modes) are drawn, on the same frame It is remarkable that the (local) Lyapunov exponents which reports the exponents for the Jacobian matrix over may provide an example of a pairing rule, see Sec.VIII: a time of the order of λ 1 where λ is (an approxi-

max− max ✁

✟ ✠ ✡ ✡ ✟ ☛ ☞

✂ ✂ ✁ mation of) the largest Lyapunov exponent. Such expo- ✆ nents will be called “local Lyapunov exponents”,45 and ✂ ✄☎

are different from the Lyapunov exponents whose eval- ✂

✆

✄☎

✆

✆

✄ ☎

45They are defined in terms of the diagonal elements of the QR ✂ decomposition of the matrix ∂u(Sτ u), linearizing the flow,

with τ fixed: in the picture τ = h210 was chosen, which is a ✂ ✄ ☎

small fraction of the time unit fixed by the integration step ✁

✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆ ✆

✂ ✂ ☎ ✁ ✁☎ ✝ ✝ ☎ ✞ ✞☎ ☎ (which is in the pictures h = 2−17). Approximating the ma- ☎ −1 1 τh Fig.7: The approximate pairing rule: graph of (λk+λn−1−k), trix ∂u(Sτ u) as V = (1+hJ(u)) , where J(u)= ∂uu˙ is the 2 Jacobian matrix of the flow, the QR decomposition of V gives n = 960, with the λk the local exponents in the previous Fig.5; a triangular matrix R> 0 and the logarithms of its eigenval- R=2048, 960 modes. ues divided by τ, denoted Λk(u), k = 1, 2,..., are sampled as u(t) evolves in time every 4h−1 steps and their averages A pairing rule emerges from Fig.7. This remarkable are the definition adopted here of the local Lyapunov expo- fact possibly suggests that the pairs consisting of two neg- nents λk. A much more accurate definition would be replacing ative exponents are associated with the attraction by the − τh 1 attracting set and the dimension of the latter is therefore V with the time ordered product k=0 (1 + hJ(Sku)): but 7 this greatly increases the computationQ time (by a factor 2 twice the number of exponents > 0, while the fractal di- here). Alternatively one could consider the eigenvalues of the mension of the attractor is the KY dimension computed symmetric part of J(u), [82]: but this also requires a large using only the pairs of exponents of opposite sign. In the computation time. case of the previous picture the following Fig.8 provides

24 25

a detail with a clearer pairing illustration: laminar regimes; i.e. when at given forcing the attractors

☎

✁ ✂

☞ ✌ ✍ ✍☎☞ ✎ ☎ ✏

✄ can be coexisting stable periodic motions. ✁

☞ ✑ ✒ ✓✔ ☞ f ✆ ✁ ✂ ✁ Furthermore changing the forcing to allow a with more than a single mode, but still keeping it acting only

✁ on the large scale k’s and of size f 2 = 1, the average

enstrophy can change substantially|| but|| the results on the ✆

✁ ✂ ✁ equivalence remain encouraging. Also the precision, i.e. ☎ ✁ ✂ the integration time step h, can have strong influence:

even hysteresis may appear if h is not small enough even ☎ ✆ ✁ ✂ though it disappears for smaller h.

✁ ✂ ✄ The results are still preliminary and hopefully will be

☎ ✆

✝ ✁ ✁ ✝ ✁ ✝ ✄ ✁ ✝ ✞ ✁ ✝ ✝ ✁ ✝ ✁ ✝ ✟ ✁ ✝ ✠ ✁ ✝ ✡ ✁ ✝ ☛ ✁ continued not only to check those so far obtained but also Fig.8: Detail of Fig.7 showing the pairs of opposite sign and to study further tests and refinements. the ones of equal (negative) sign. The vertical line marks the k 452 where the negative pairs begin to appear: hence Remarks: (1) Since a real force fk transforms real data ≃ suggest a dimension of the attracting set 904 out of 960. uk into real ones, there will be an invariant distribution 1 Graph of 2 (λk + λn−1−k), n = 960, with the λk the local concentrated on real velocity fields uk: it may, as N (or exponents in the previous Fig.5. R or both) grows, become unstable to perturbations of u which break the symmetry (i.e. reality of uk). Neverthe- The pairing appears exact, but is is not: as it could be less such distribution may be unique among those which seen by drawing the pairing line on a larger scale. Still are generated by a real initial uk: hence, as mentioned even on the scale of Fig.5 it is not possible to distinguish in Sec.XVII, to check equivalence it becomes necessary, the pairing line from an exactly horizontal line. in general, to identify other invariant conditions on u on A pairing property, quite manifest in Fig.5,6, was pro- which to base the selections of pairs of equivalent distri- posed in [52] as possible in NS fluids. It could be an ap- butions besides the corresponding R and E; for instance proximate pairing reflecting an exact one which should compare only distributions concentrated on real uk’s. hold for the spectrum of the fluid equations with “Ek- (2) The simplest checks of the equivalence concern “gauge mann friction” (i.e. with viscosity force νu instead of − invariant” observables: at least possible different station- ν∆u). ary states related by the symmetry (i.e. that can be For ν = 0 the equation can be considered a Hamil- transformed into each other by application of the symme- tonian equation with conjugate variables (δ, u), called try) will attribute the same averages to such observable. Arnold-Euler equation, where δ(x) is the displacement The R α rev = 1 is an example and the average work (with respect to an initial configuration of fluid parti- h i 2 2 W rev = W irr or also uk rev = uk irr are ex- cles) of the “fluid particle” that reaches the point x at amples.h i h i h| | i h| | i the instant in which the fluid velocity at x is u(x). So u is a momentum variable while δ is a position variable d and dt δ(x)= u(x) (e.g. see [52]). Formally the Ekmann equation, aside the infinite di- XIX. OTHER RELATIONS. COMMENTS. mensionality, is covered by the pairing theorem [47]: hence its Lyapunov spectrum should have the exponents Several universal relations have been proposed in the paired to ν, see Appendix D . In [52] the idea has recent literature. I select below two among them. been proposed− that the Lyapunov spectrum of the (δ, u)- system and that of the u are related by a symmetry which would imply pairing also for the latter spectrum. A. Transient fluctuation theorem The NS equation viscosity is not proportional to u and the argument in [47] does not apply, not even formally. Deals, [85], with reversible evolutions starting from Still in [52] the possible pairing in the NS spectrum is random initial data chosen from an equilibrium distri- discussed (called “barometric formula”) and for large cut- bution of particles (hence, in the nontrivial cases, not off is proposed to pair λk, λn 1 k to a suitable curve ck − − stationary), of Boltzmann-Gibbs kind, or more gener- (which would be close to a constant in large intervals of ally from a distribution symmetric under time reversal k). (which, in most cases, is velocity reversal) and with den- A few more simulations have been performed to test sity with respect to the volume. the conjecture, all in 2D, because the 3D case is too demanding. For a few further tests in systems with In this case the statement is that the probability den- sity that a phase space volume contracts by a factor eA 48, 224, 960, 3968 modes (i.e. increasing the cut-off N) A and for R up to 8192, see [84] where particular attention compared to the probability that it contracts by e− in is dedicated to the approximate pairing, see Sec.VIII, of a time interval τ is such that: the Lyapunov exponents. Very few tests have been done P (A) = eA, τ < (19.1) for R small: but the conjecture should hold even in the P ( A) ∀ ∞ −

25 26

which is an immediate consequence of the definition (i.e. In this respect there are other relations which are exact of the above few lines preceding it): no further assump- and useful identities with several interdisciplinary appli- tion is necessary. cations in nonequilibrium phenomena. Since Eq.(19.1) is sometimes compared to Eq.(6.3) (or An example is provided by an implementation of the Eq.(6.4)) then, for the purpose of comparison, the σ+ simplest “Monte Carlo method”: here the general pur- should be defined as the average as τ of A and pose of the Monte Carlo methods is intended as the use → ∞ τ def A of a controlled random number generator to produce ran- p should be set p = . In terms of p, σ+, τ Eq.(19.1) τσ+ dom events with a prescribed distribution. becomes formally identical to Eq.(6.4). For instance suppose that it is necessary to produce It is claimed that Eq.(19.1), being valid for all τ, will spin configurations on a N-points lattice with a dis- βU(σ) L imply the fluctuation relation for the stationary state tribution proportional to e− ,β > 0, with U(σ) = reached by the evolution at infinite time and for the vari- R JRσR, where JR 0 are are given “couplings” for the able 1 A. However the stationary state in nonequi- ≥ τσ+ Pspins σr = 1 with r in a subset R = (r1,...,rN ) . ± ⊂ L librium cases is singular with respect to the initial state Suppose available a random number generator G0 able and typical fluctuations observed in time τ have the form to generate a known distribution of σ, for instance a 1 1 pσ+τ so, if σ+ > 0 as it is in nonequilibrium cases, the Bernoulli shift ( 2 , 2 ) distribution; then follow the algo- quantity A in Eq.(19.1) has an unclear meaning when the rithm, also called a “protocol”: system has reached a stationary state and a time τ =+ σ has already elapsed.46 ∞ (1) generate a spin configuration for the Bernoulli dis- tribution using a deterministic random number genera- A proof of any relation between Eq.(19.1) and the FR tor G (initialized beforehand once and for all with a discussed in the present review, in any event, has never 0 fixed number). This plays the role of selection of initial been published, in spite of several announcements. data from a known initial state (here a sample Bernoulli path). And compute the weight of the σ in the Bernoulli shift (which in the case under consideration would be βU0(σ) 1 N B. The Jarzinsky relation e− 1, i.e. probability Z0− =2− ). ≡ β(U(σ) U (σ)) (2) compute U(σ) and the ratio e− − 0 W (σ) β(U(σ) U (σ)) (3) attribute to σ the weight e e− − 0 . The Eq.(19.1) is an identity but nevertheless it can be ≡ useful, as shown by its applications in various domains Repeat the protocol many times: the statistic deter- and this might be the explanation of the lack of interest mined on the outputs σ1, σ2,... by assigning them the on the FR and the Chaotic hypothesis. β(U(σi) U0(σi)) weights e− − acquires eventually the PDF 1 P (σ)= Z− exp βU(σ) and the relation −

W Z 46Simple examples of the meaning of Eq.(19.1) compared to e = (19.2) h i Z0 FR can be constructed: which exhibit systems, as chaotic as wished, evolving towards a stationary state with average holds with the average being taken with respect to the phase space contraction σ+ > 0 and which for every finite initial distribution (i.e. the Bernoulli shift in the present time satisfy Eq.(19.1) but at infinite time do not satisfy the case). FR. An example of such a map follows: let S0 be a map on the unit circle defined by the evolution at time t = 1 The procedure can be used to generate the Gibbs dis- (say) ofϕ ˙ = sin ϕT: it has ϕ = π as an unstable fixed point tribution at temperature β and Hamiltonian H1(x) from and ϕ = 0 as− a stable fixed point (with Lyapunov exponents a Gibbs distribution with Hamiltonian H0(x), [86]. Imag- λ0 = 1, respectively). Let I be the reflection of the point ine to have at hand a system in equilibrium with Hamil- ± ϕ at the circle center. Then the evolution is I-reversible tonian H0(x) and a way (“protocol”) to force the evolu- dϕ and the distribution µ0(dϕ) = 2π is I-symmetric. Hence tion of a configuration via equations of motion following Eq.(19.1) holds for all finite τ: at τ = the distribution of a time dependent Hamiltonian Ht(x) which evolves from p = 1 τ cos(Skϕ) = 1 A evolves to∞δ(p) which does not τ k=0 0 τ H0 at time 0 to H1 at time 1: satisfyP the FR for any p > 0 although σ+ = 1. The exam- ple can be easily adapted to deal with a chaotic evolution: it (1) generate an initial state x by picking a sample out of is enough to consider the dynamical system acting on pairs the initial distribution, and (ϕ, x) which evolve in (S0ϕ, SΞx), where Ξ is any Anosov map (2) act, by changing the parameters of the Hamilto- reversible under a map J. This is reversible under the time nian, so that x evolves with the time dependent Hamil- reversal (ϕ, x) (Iϕ,Jx). Then Eq.(19.1) holds but leads → tonian Ht as x S0,tx and keep track of the energy to a relation with slope σ+ = σ(Ξ) + 1, where σ(Ξ) is the W (x)= H(S x→) H (x) phase space contraction of the map Ξ), while FR predicts the t 0,t 0 − βW1(x) correct slope σ(Ξ), because the example is a simple example (3) weigh the output at time t = 1 with e− : eventu- of a system with a smooth hyperbolic attracting set (i.e. the ally the statistics of the weighted outputs will be the dis- 1 βH (x) pairs (0,x)), hence it satisfies the Chaotic Hypothesis: a case tribution Z− e− 1 , as it is immediately checked using in which the FR is a theorem. Likewise a flow example can the Liouville theorem S0,tdx = dx (where dx = dpdq in be easily constructed. The example is due to F.Bonetto. canonical coordinates).

26 27

2 The above two protocols are realizations of a (naive) α(u)− D(u)χ(α(u)) rev where χ(z) = 1 if z 0 and 0 “Monte Carlo” method: the second can be particularly hotherwise. i ≥ useful, aside numerical simulations, even in applications to bio-systems where it has been possible to find a way to measure W1 at each run of the protocol. The quantity W1 has been identified, in several cases, D. Wishes with the work performed on the system during one it- eration of the protocol: it has then been used particu- larly to measure the free energy variation between two Several tests of the FR have been performed in the lit- different equilibria at the same temperature: β∆F = erature. Unfortunately the FR is confused with the sim- βW log e− 1 (with the average being over the statistics ilar relation called above the “transient fluctuation the- of− theh initiali data), [86]. orem” (possibly even omitting the qualification of tran- Notice that access to W1 is the only requirement neces- sient). sary: the random generator being the initial equilibrium It is quite interesting that in most simulations the tests state and the evolution Ht only needs to be always the performed really deal with the FR; hence it would be same, each time the protocol is run. Of course it is nec- very interesting to mount experiments to test the FR (in essary to be able to justify that the measurements of W1 nonequilibrium situations). really evaluate the work W done on the system: in con- Many experimental works, very delicate and difficult, crete cases it may be not easy to be sure that all forces that claim to have tested the FR have, unfortunately, in- are taken into account, in particular the ones that change stead only tested the above transient relation; and could H0 to Ht. It may also be difficult to make sure that the be, perhaps even easily, devoted to a real test of FR. Or protocol used is always exactly the same. the tests have been devoted to check the linearity in the symmetry relation Eq.(6.3) for the fluctuations of a quan- tity identified with p but neither attempting to check the C. Ruelle-Lieb bounds relation with the phase space contraction nor examining the validity of the assumption that the attracting set has There are remarkable rigorous bounds on the aver- dimension equal to the of phase space. ages, with respect to the stationary distributions, of Beautiful laboratory experiments on nano materials, the eigenvalues of the symmetric part of the Jacobian proteins, granular materials, ... have been performed and matrix J for the NS equations, symbolically given by are, very often, remarkable and innovative from the tech- 1 Ji,j = νδji∆ (∂iuj + ∂j ui), acting on the incompress- nical view point but in all cases, that I am aware of, at − 2 ible velocity fields.45 The averages over time of such best they test the transient theorem. The study of the eigenvalues are a kind of “local exponents”. The esti- FR has not yet attracted sufficient interest, with the no- mates give an upper estimate NJ to the maximum num- table exception of the many numerical simulations. ber of exponents which add up, ordered by decreasing The check of the fluctuation relation in stationary e size, to a non negative value, hence also an upper bound states of systems in nonequilibrium is a test of the on the number of non negative Lyapunov exponents. Chaotic Hypothesis, which is a physical assumption, un- The numbers NJ are, [82, 83], bounded in dimension like the checks of the transient fluctuation relation (which 2 and 3 (and more); and in dimension 2 the bounds can per se does not test any physical assumption, because be expressed, [83,e Eq(34)], in terms of the average D = testing an identity or a theorem does not provide new 2 2 k uk of the enstrophy D(u): information). h k | | iirr P Also some experimental works limit the analysis to 2 2 NJ A(2π) √R D, A =0.55... (19.3) studying the PDF of the work done or of the heat arising ≤ in the experiment but, in my view, not always enough e 1 As seen in Sec.XVII R D = W irr with W the power attention is dedicated to check that all forces acting are spent by the external force, seeh commenti on Eq.(17.7). taken into account. This leads, sometimes, to claim The 2-dimensional estimates are in [83, Eq/(43)]: there (more or less openly) that the PDF of the work or heat are also found similar estimates, in higher dimension, ex- generated at temperature T in a process cannot be nor- tending earlier ones in [82]. In 3 dimensions the NJ are malized with kB T , as in Eq.(4.3): therefore, it is con- not bounded in terms of µa( dx≥ (∂u(x))2), a = rev,irr, cluded, the stationary FR is false. · e but involve powers of ∂u higherR than 2. The problem seems to be a certain resilience to invest The estimates apply to the irreversible NS equations, time to follow the ideas behind the chaotic hypothesis truncated at arbitrary ultraviolet cut-off, and involve (i.e. Anosov systems) and the general Axiom A attrac- 1 only the eigenvalues of 2 (J +J ∗) averaged in time: which tors: an example of the attitude towards these ideas is in can be evaluated in simulations. Being rigorous they can the quoted statements in [8]; see also Appendix A below. be important in checks of the accuracy of simulations. In spite of all the above remarks I still hope that the FR In the reversible equations R2D should be replaced by relation will be tested in “real” experimental contexts.

27 28

Appendix A: About certain comments on CH eral circumstances and through more elementary argu- ments.” In the above sections quotes from [8] have been repro- but no reference is made here to the applicability of the duced without really commenting them. The reason is “earlier retrospective result” to stationary nonequilibria that the quotes were written when the Chaotic Hypoth- to which the Fluctuation Theorem applies, see46. esis had been just developed and many had not yet had Then on p. 347 the view is found that: the time to really study the subject. But the same comments have appeared in a second “Theoretical constructs such as “measures”, should be edition of the just quoted book, [87], which I have seen viewed with a healthy suspicion until algorithms for eval- only very recently (after completion of the present text). uating them are supplied. The chaos inherent in interest- Since the comments have had some resonance the next ing differential equations guarantees that our only access few lines try to clarify some of the issues. to the ”strange sets” which constitute attractors and re- pellers will be representative time series from dynamical The Author of [87] criticizes the use of the Anosov simulations. In no way can we construct, or even con- systems as paradigm of chaotic motions. The full section ceive of constructing, a Sinai-Ruelle-Bowen measure for from p.344 to p.347 discusses the merits and demerits of an interesting system.” Anosov systems. On p. 344 begins However for most purposes by the CH Hamiltonian sys- ... has discussed the possibility that the useful proper- tems should be considered Anosov systems (literally, ex- ties exhibited by certain oversimplified and quite rare dy- cept of course the integrable ones). Hence the assump- namical systems, termed ”Anosov systems”, have coun- tion that the attracting set is the full phase space is not terparts in the more usual thermostatted systems studied always unreasonable. with nonequilibrium simulation methods. Anosov systems Furthermore it is useful to stress that there are easy are oversimplifications, like square clouds or spherical examples of systems satisfying the CH, with equal or dis- chickens... joint attracting and repelling surfaces, time reversible, This seems to refer to the proposal that the “Axiom A” with as many degrees of freedom and negative Lyapunov systems should be the right paradigm for generic chaotic exponents as wished (unrelated to the number of posi- systems, [19, 88]: a proposal which however is not cen- tive ones) and whose SRB measure is explicitly and com- tered on Anosov systems. The Axiom A systems are sys- pletely constructed, [11, Sec.10.2]. tems which have an the attracting set on which motion has strong chaotic properties (is essentiallyA hyperbolic). And the CH just proposes, in its final formulation, Appendix B: Local Fluctuations. An example. (1996), that for many purposes the axiom A paradigm can be strengthened and simplified by requiring in addi- The phase space contraction in the evolution of a tion that is an attracting surface, possibly of dimension macroscopic system is typically a macroscopic quantity: lower thanA that of phase space, on which the motion is whether it is the amount of heat ceded to the thermostats an Anosov system. Even in time reversible cases can or the amount of work performed by the systems. A be different from its time reversal image. This is explic- Therefore the average phase space contraction σ+ itly stated with related problems and examples in [20, 21] which controls the large fluctuations, Sec.VI and the oc- and in several successive publications. currence of “anomalous” patterns, Sec.XII, cannot be re- The underlying idea being that it is not possible to ally observed in measurements on macroscopic systems. distinguish, in a system of physical interest, a fractal of Avoiding comments on the many experimental fluctu- Hausdorff dimension = 106 +3.1415... from a surface of ations observations which claim to check the FR,47 the exactly 106 dimensions. question asked here is whether a kind of fluctuation rela- In summary the Chaotic Hypothesis only assumes that tion could be defined, and constrain quantities depending the dynamics under consideration behaves (in some re- on events that can be observed in very small parts of the spects) like Anosov dynamics. This is after all not too system. astonishing if the most relevant degrees of freedom are In other words is it possible to give a meaning to a chaotic like those of Anosov systems. local fluctuation relation? [2, Ch4.9]. Most of the subsequent criticism in [87] is anchored The following relies on Sec.XV: it is inserted as it pro- on keeping the identification between the CH and the vides a quite interesting example on how to make use proposal that the whole dynamical system is an Anosov of the symbolic dynamics representation of the Anosov system. systems. On p.346 the fluctuation theorem is called a “retro- spective result” and identified with the true Fluctuation Theorem, Sec.VI above, claiming: 47Sometimes claiming to have checked it and sometimes claim- “These same ”results” were actually given earlier by ing the opposite, while very often dealing with unrelated tran- Denis Evans and several of his coworkers, for more gen- sient phenomena.

28 29

A simple example, in a system with time reversal sym- which is reversible for the time reversal map I : (x, y)= metry, will be discussed in which a local entropy pro- (y, x). In the rest of this section this system will be duction rate can be defined and checked to satisfy a local considered in more detail. L L L 1 version of FR. A general view on the matter can be found A Markovian partition for S (S )− will be P0 0 × 0 in [89, 90]. chosen to be the product of partitions L ,..., L 2 2 1 1 P− P − The analysis deals again with maps rather than − L 48 for the single site maps S0 and S0 ; and ε will be the flows. L P partition Θε 0 existing and defined by the structural Consider a system with a translation invariant spatial P rev rev stability map Θε, conjugating S0 to Sε , [11, Sec.10.2]. structure, e.g. a periodic chain, or a d-dimensional square Hence the history of a point x will be a sequence of lattice [ L,L]d with periodic boundary, of (2L)d weakly − labels σi;j with i M and j ( , ): naturally i can interacting Anosov maps. be called a “space∈ label” while∈ j−∞a “time∞ label”. The su- The phase space of the system is M = x = perscript rev will be omitted in what follows, to simplify (2L)d { (...x1, x0, x1, x2,...) = 0 , where xi 0 are notations. points in a manifold } : toM fix ideas we take ∈ Mto be a The analysis in Sec.XV applied to the Anosov map S , M0 M0 ε torus, on which an Anosov map S0 acts; then define the will give a representation of the volume distribution µ0 “coupled map”: and of the SRB distribution µsrb,ε for Sε via, respectively, suitable potentials Φε, Φε±. Let [0, τ] be a time interval and Λ = [ 1 L, 1 L]d = M, − 2 2 Sε(x)i = S0xi +εg(xi 1, xi, xi+1), i = ..., 0, 1,... (B.1) Λ] = Ld. Via the Jacobian matrix J (x) = ∂ (S x) − Λ x ε |define the phase space contraction and the time averaged where g is a smooth perturbation, i.e. a smooth periodic contraction per site as, respectively: function on 3. M0 1 If ε is small and the perturbation has short range it η (x)= log det(∂ (S x)) Λ,ε − Λ | x ε | is proved in [36, 93, 94] that, defining the map Sε as in | | τ (B.3) Eq.(B.1) with periodic boundary condition (i.e. identi- 1 1 j ηΛ,ε,τ = lim ηΛ,ε(S x) fying the site L with L), the map Sε remains, if ε is Λ τ τ ε − →∞ Xj=0 small enough, still Anosov. It is conjugated to S0, via | | 34 a H¨older continuous correspondence Θε, see , by asso- The limit of ηL,ε,+ in Eq.(B.3) as τ exists with ciating points x and x′ with the same history under S0 → ∞ probability 1 with respect to the volume µvol, as well to and Sε. Furthermore there is ε0 > 0 such that the above the SRB distribution µsrb,ε, and is x-independent aside holds for ε <ε uniformly in the system size L. 49 | | 0 x’s in a set of 0 volume: because the statistical properties Here the purpose is to study whether a local version of the volume distribution are those of the Gibbs distri- of the FR can hold at least in an example derived from + bution with potential Φε , hence enjoy strong ergodicity Sε: but the Sε is, in general, not reversible. A related re- properties, as any SRB distribution, with respect to time rev versible map Sε can be easily constructed on the “dou- translations. 50 τ bled” phase space = 0 0 by setting: t The phase space contraction t=0 ηL,ε(Sεx) can be M M ×M + ϕ rev 1 expressed, see Sec.XV, via the potentialsP Φε , Φε−, Φε , Sε (x, y) = (Sε(x), (Sε)− (y)) (B.2) ϕ where Φε is a potential that describes the interpolation + between Φε− to Φε and which is therefore “localized” ϕ (see comment to Eq.((15.1))) in the sense that Φε (σI ) = ϕ 6 0 only if I contains the sites 0 or L and Φ (σI ) 48 ε,I This time the reason is not “for simplicity”, but because in κ I | | ≤ the case of coupled flows, even if the coupling has short range Ce− | | for some C,κ > 0). Given the symbolic history and is weak, there seems to be no detailed and constructive σ of x, the Eq.(15.6) can be expressed as: general theory of the SRB distributions, because no simple 1 + conditions are known that, via perturbation techniques, yield (Φ (σ ) Φ− (σ )) + ... τLd ε,K K − ε,K K (B.4) hyperbolicity of the flow and allow studying its properties. K MX[0,τ] For a glimpse on the kind of complications which arise when ⊂ × studying flows consult, [91, 92]. Instead, at least in the case where K = I [a,b] is a parallelepiped in Λ [0, τ], def × × of coupled maps, the theory is quite well understood, [11, 36, and Φz = Φz for z = , ϕ, and the ... in- 93, 94], as in the example in Eq.(B.1) below, at small coupling ε,K t [a,b] I+t ∈ ϕ 51± ε. dicate a correctionP K Φε,K (σK ), . t A natural math- 49 The SRB distribution for the evolution Sε with L = could P L ∞ also be defined via the SRB distribution µsrb,ε for the system Sε consisting of the sites labeled from L and L and then − 50 taking the limit µsrb = limL→∞ µsrb,L, [93]. Likewise the space-time limit ηε,+ exists because of the space- This is possible because of the uniformity in ε<ε0: below, time ergodicity of the short range Gibbs processes describing however, L< will be fixed, keeping in mind that the results the volume as well as the SRB distributions. ∞ 51 −1 will hold for all L if ε <ε0. Relatively vanishing as L uniformly in x. | |

29 30 ematical definition of the “local average phase space in which the latter quantities are accessible to local mea- 1 τ x contraction” could be the log JΛ (S ) where surements, whether Eq.(B.7) holds. This is attempted in − τΛ0 t=0 0 ′ some simulations, [45]. JΛ0 (x)= det(∂i(Sεx)i ) . But thisP is a quantity difficult to express| in a useful way.| The interest of the above special example lies in the However it is also possible to propose a different defi- statements independence on the total size of the systems: nition of local average phase space contraction based on they also mean that the fluctuation theorems may lead the representation Eq.(B.4) of the average of the loga- to observable consequences if one looks at the far more rithms of the full Jacobian. The latter can be expressed probable microscopic fluctuations of the local entropy as Eq.(B.4) up to a quantity uniformly bounded in L: and production rate,[36, 93, 94]. For more details see [34]. the contribution to Eq.(B.4) from the parallelepipeds K’s entirely contained in Λ0 [0, τ] is: × Appendix C: Reversible heating

loc def 1 Imagine a rarefied gas enclosed in a cubic container of ηΛ ,ε,τ = Φ+,K(σ) Φ ,K (σ) (B.5) 0 d − τL0 − side L described by a canonical distribution at inverse K ΛX0 [0,τ]   ⊂ × 1 N temperature β− . The potential energy is i=1 mgzi + loc def see Eq.(15.1),(15.4); the ηΛ ,ε,τ can be, heuristically, v(x x ) = MgH + V , with M=totalP mass and 0 i,j i − j called the “local contraction rate”. It can be uniformly PH the height of the center of mass. The initial free en- 1 β(V +gP ) 3N 3N bounded (in τ,L). ergy if F (β,g) = β− log e− d pd q. The Given Λ let ηloc be the time average ηloc define: − 0 Λ0,ε,+ Λ0,ε,τ entropy can be computedR via Gibbs’ formula S0 = ρ(p, q) log ρ(p, q)d3N pd3N q. loc − 1 ηΛ,ε,τ (x) 1 ηΛ0,ε,τ (x) RThe gas is set out of equilibrium by changing the grav- p′ = , p = loc (B.6) τ ηΛ,ε,+ τ η ity g to a new value g′ for instance suddenly at time t =0 Λ0,ε,+ or following a given prescription t g(t),t [0, τ] with → ∈ loc 1 g(τ)= g′,τ < . Then it is let to evolve. and remark that η = ηΛ,ε,+ + o(L− ) (because of Λ0,ε,+ 0 Since the evolution∞ is Hamiltonian (although not au- the SRB distribution representation of a Gibbs process). tonomous) ρ(p, q) evolves in ρ(p, q; t) and the latter tends, It can also be shown that to leading order as L ,L,τ 0 → as t , to a new equilibrium state in the gravity po- the large deviation rates for p′,p in Eq.(B.6) have the → ∞ 3N 3N ∞ d d 0 0 tential mg′z; but ρ(p, q; t) log ρ(p, q; t)d pd q re- form τL ζ (p′), τL0ζ (p), with ζ = ζ because ζ is mains equal to S .− Therefore at the end of the evolu- obtained as∞ a thermodynamic∞ limit∞ of a kind∞ of partition∞ 0 R tion the new distribution ρ(p, q, ) will be an equilibrium function: for a proof see [95, (5.14)]. ∞ d state of the system in the modified gravity field. Therefore by the FT applied to Sε it is L ζ (p′) d d loc ∞ − It will not be, however, any more a canonical Gibbs L ζ ( p′) = L p′ηΛ,ε,+ and, since ηΛ ,ε,+ = ηΛ,ε,+ + 1 ∞ 0 state at temperature β− in a gravity field with acceler- d − o(L0), the large deviations rate for p in Eq.(B.6) satisfies ation g′; if the system is ergodic on the energy surface a FR of the form then the final distribution reached at infinite time after d d loc suddenly increasing the gravity g to a new value g′ will L0(ζ (p) ζ ( p)) = pL0ηΛ ,ε,+ ∞ − ∞ − 0 (B.7) be (integration over p′, q′ only)” d = p r (L ηΛ,ε,+) mc ′ ′ d µ∞(dpdq)= µβ(dp′dq′)µE(p ,q )(dpdq) (C.1) L0 Z with r = Ld and p p∗,p∗ 1, up to corrections of d 1 | | ≤ ≥ O(L − ): which means that the global and local large mc 0 where µE (dpdq) is the microcanonical distribution with fluctuations rates are proportional and trivially related energy E and E′(p′, q′) = K(p′)+ V (q′)+ Mg′H(q′) is L0 d by a rescaling which equals r = ( L ) up to a correction the sum of the kinetic energy, internal potential energy 1 d 1 bounded κ− L0− with κ bounding the range of the SRB and energy of the center of mass in a gravity acceleration potential, as in Eq.(15.1). g′. The universal slope 1 in the global FR is modified into The distribution Eq.(C.1) will be equivalent to a L0 d r = ( L ) in the local FR. The Eq.(B.7) can be proved canonical Gibbs distribution (with temperature different 1 for the system in Eq.(B.2). from β− ) only in the thermodynamic limit: in the finite However p in Eq.(B.6) is not related to a measurable system that we are considering it will be different by cor- quantity, as it cannot be hoped to be able to measure rections vanishing in the thermodynamic limit. Yet the directly the local phase space contraction .defined as in new state will be a stationary state close to a canonical Eq.(B.5). (or any other equivalent) equilibrium state, ′ 1 Still the phase space contraction is often related to the To estimate, actually to define, the temperature β − amount of heat ceded or the work done on the surround- of the new state imagine to identify the above µ∞ with ings by a system in a stationary state, as exemplified in a canonical distribution µβ′ , i.e. neglect the finite volume the case of Eq.(4.4): hence it is tempting to test, in cases corrections. Computing the Gibbs entropy S of the new ∞

30 31

equilibrium (reached after infinite time) and make use of A map from O to a configuration A′ diff(T ) in- the identity between the Gibbs entropies of the initial finitesimally close to one in Sdiff(T ) can∈ be parameter- and final states: ized by δ, ζ with δ Sdiff(T ) and ζ an infinitesimal variation of the form∈∂z(δ(ξ)) for some scalar z. 1 β(V +gP ) 3N 3N F = log e− d pd q = T log Z0 The coordinates δ, ζ can be checked to form a system of −β Z − (C.2) coordinates “orthogonal and well adapted”, in the sense S = ∂T F = log Z0 β V + gP δ ξ − − − h i of definition 12 in [50], to the surface J( ( )) = 1 in 2 2 2 ∂gS β = β ( P V P V )+ g( P P ) the space diff(T ) of torus diffeomorphisms in the metric | h i − h ih i h i − h i g(δ, ζ) attributing to an infinitesimal variation (w + z) 1 with T = β− , P = MgH and ∂gS β =0 at g = 0: thus of (δ, ζ) the square length: the new equilibrium cannot have the| same6 entropy as the initial state if the temperature remained the same unless (w(δ(ξ))2 + ∂z(δ(ξ))2)dξ (D.1) β′ = β (because in general ∂gS β = 0, e.g. if V 0 it is Z P 26 > P 2). If the final state| has6 to become a≃ canoni- for the infinitesimal variations (w, ∂z) of (δ, ζ) with w hcal distributioni h i at some temperature (e.g. the above es- ′ 1 a divergence free field and ∂z a gradient field. Further- timated β − ) then the system will have to be attached more if ξ δ(ξ) is an incompressible configuration in to a thermostat and some heat exchange will take place → Sdiff(T ) and δ′(ξ)= δ(ξ)+ w(δ(ξ)) + ∂z(δ(ξ)) an in- and the entire transformation will be irreversible: in any finitesimally close one in diff(T ) then event, if the system container was really adiabatic and at any finite (or infinite) time the gravity acceleration was dropped back to the initial value, then the system should J(δ′(ξ)) 1 = ∆z(δ(ξ)), (“Liouville’s theorem”) in the same time return to the initial canonical state. See − 2 2 dξ(J(δ′(ξ)) 1) = dξ(∆z(δ(ξ))) also [96] for the analysis of equally interesting cases. Z − Z (D.2) = dx(∆z(x))2 Z Appendix D: Arnold-Euler geodesics depending only on the “violation of the constraint” J 1 − The analysis of [47] applies to the geodesic flows: in the above orthogonal and well adapted coordinates. which are Hamiltonian flows with Hamiltonian H(p, q)= Therefore a general theorem on constrained motions, 1 1 (for the constraint J(δ(ξ)) = 1) can be applied: because 2 g(q)− pp. Hence the Lyapunov exponents of q˙ = 1 1 the perfection criteria for the constraint are met as a con- g(q)p, p˙ = (∂qg(q)− )pp νp + f with f indepen- − 2 − sequence of Eq.(D.1) , (D.2), see definition 13, Sec. 3.7, dent of p, q are paired to 1 ν, see footnote18, with a 2 and proposition 13, Sec. 3.8 in [50]. Hence the mo- p q − general H( , ). tions obey Euler-Lagrange equations for the Lagrangian The Euler flow is a geodesic flow, [97, 98], and the (δ˙ , δ)= 1 δ˙ (ξ)2dξ with the ideal holonomic constraint u δ δ 2 canonical coordinates are , where is the diffeomor- LJ(δ(ξ)) 1. phism bringing the reference state O of the fluid into R In other≡ words the motions driven by the Lagrangian the actual state A: if a force f is added which does not δ˙ δ ξ 1 δ˙ ξ 2 δ 2 change the Hamiltonian nature of the motion (e.g. if, as Λ( , )= d 2 ( ) + Λ(J( (ξ)) 1) , in the space L  −  in [47], f(q) is locally conservative) and if, furthermore, diff(T ) RSdiff(T ), are motions which depend on the a viscosity force of the form νu is also added, then the auxiliary⊃ parameter Λ and, if the initial data are an in- − ν above shows that pairing takes place (formally) to 2 . compressible configuration δ Sdiff(T ), in the limit A formal proof that the Euler equations for a fluid− can as Λ + converge, at any∈ prefixed time, to motions be written as Arnold’s geodesic flow is summarized as fol- driven→ by∞ the constrained Lagrangian . lows (correcting also typos in the somewhat obscure ar- Explicitly, let u(x) = δ˙ (ξ): since atL time ε > 0 δ, u gument in the appendix theof [52]). Let ξ x = δ(ξ) be become δε(ξ) and uε(x)= δε(x + εu(x)), it follows that → 52 the diffeomorphism in Sdiff(T ) diff(T ) mapping δ¨(ξ)= ∂tu(x) + (u(x) ∂)u(x) and the Euler-Lagrange the reference fluid configuration ⊂O into the actual one · equations for the constrained become the Euler equa- A. Here and below the differential operators are denoted tions for a perfect incompressibleL fluid, obtained as a ∂, . . . but are intended to be ∂ ,... when operating on e e e δ(ξ) geodesic flow for the Hamiltonian H(u, δ) defined as functions of δ(ξ). 1 2 1 dξ u(δ(ξ)) + (∆− ((∂u) (∂u)))(δ(ξ)) (D.3) Z 2 ·
1 52Notation: diff(T ) denotes the set of the general torus dif- with p(x)= ∆− ((∂u) (∂u))(x) interpreted as “pres- − · e e feomorphisms and Sdiff(T ) is the subset of diffeomorphisms sure”. ∂δ(ξ) with Jacobian J(δ)(ξ) det( ) = 1 e.g. , if d = 3, δ∂ξ If a force f(x)e = ( ∂2eΦ(x), ∂1Φ(x)), with Φ a ≡ − J(δ)(ξ)= ∂δ1(ξ) ∂δ2(ξ) ∂δ3(ξ) 1. given scalar independent of the fluid configuration, ∧ · ≡

31 32 acts on the fluid then to Eq.(D.3) a term δ(ξ) general property of geodesic flows to which friction and · ( ∂2Φ(δ(ξ)), ∂1Φ(δ(ξ))) has to be added. forcing are added (as it fails in the flow with Hamiltonian − 1 2 Recalling that x = δ(ξ), the equations of motion are H = 2 p , i.e. for the equationsq ˙ = p, p˙ = νp + f). I the pair: neither succeded in proving the just mentioned− double de- generacy of the Lyapunov spectrum for the Arnold-Euler ∂tδ(ξ)= u(δ(ξ)) equations nor in convincing myself that it is a reasonable ∂ u(x)+(u(x) ∂)u(x)= νu(x) ∂p(x)+ f(x) (D.4) hypothesis. t · − − The results just discussed do not apply to the NS flow ande by the just mentionede resulte in [47],e displaye a set of because the viscosity is ν∆u: however a pairing to a line Lyapunov exponents, local and global, paired to ν/2. which is not constant but which depends on the scale in − In the Euler-Arnold case the exponents are naturally which the motion is studied, compatible with the above divided in two classes: the exponents relative to the u simulations, was proposed in [52]. coordinates, ’fluid exponents’, which do not depend (ex- Acknowledgments: I profited from discussions with plicitly) from the evolution of the δ coordinates and the L.Biferale, M.Cencini, M.De Pietro, V.Lucarini in others. Sec.XVIII , and L.S.Young in Sec.B , whom I thank It would be natural to think that the other exponents warmly. are simply a copy of the first: if so the fluid exponents, alone, would be paired. However if true this cannot be a

[1] G. Gallavotti and D. Cohen. Dynamical ensembles in Functional Analysis and its Applications, 2(1):64–89, nonequilibrium statistical mechanics. Physical Review 1968. Letters, 74:2694–2697, 1995. [15] Ya. G. Sinai. Construction of Markov partitions. Func- [2] G. Gallavotti. Nonequilibrium and irreversibility. The- tional Analysis and its Applications, 2(3):70–80, 1968. oretical and Mathematical Physics. Springer-Verlag and [16] R. Bowen and D. Ruelle. The ergodic theory of axiom A http://ipparco.roma1.infn.it & arXiv 1311.6448, Heidel- flows. Inventiones Mathematicae, 29:181–205, 1975. berg, 2014. [17] D. Ruelle and F. Takens. On the nature of turbulence. [3] V. Jakˆsi´cand C-A. Pillet. Ergodic properties of classi- Communications in Mathematical Physics, 20:167–192, cal dissipative systems i. Acta Mathematica, 181:245282, 1971. 1998. [18] D. Ruelle. Turbulence, strange attractors and chaos. [4] J. Kurchan. Fluctuation theorem for stochastic dynam- World Scientific, New-York, 1995. ics. Journal of Physics A, 31:3719–3729, 1998. [19] D. Ruelle. Chaotic motions and strange attractors. [5] J.P. Eckmann, C.A. Pillet, and L. Rey-Bellet. Non- Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Cambridge University equilibrium statistical mechanics of anharmonic chains Press, Cambridge, 1989. coupled to two heat baths at different temperatures. [20] F. Bonetto and G. Gallavotti. Reversibility, coarse grain- Communications in Mathematical Physics, 201:657–697, ing and the chaoticity principle. Communications in 1999. Mathematical Physics, 189:263–276, 1997. [6] J. Lebowitz and H. Spohn. A Gallavotti–Cohen type [21] F. Bonetto, G. Gallavotti, and P. Garrido. Chaotic prin- symmetry in large deviation functional for stochastic dy- ciple: an experimental test. Physica D, 105:226–252, namics. Journal of Statistical Physics, 95:333–365, 1999. 1997. [7] C. Maes. The fluctuation theorem as a Gibbs property. [22] D. Ruelle. Measures describing a turbulent flow. Annals Journal of Statistical Physics, 95:367–392, 1999. of the New York Academy of Sciences, 357:1–9, 1980. [8] W. Hoover. Time reversibility Computer simulation, and [23] G. Gallavotti and D. Cohen. Dynamical ensembles in Chaos. World Scientific, Singapore, 1999. stationary states. Journal of Statistical Physics, 80:931– [9] V.I. Arnold and A. Avez. Ergodic probems of Classi- 970, 1995. cal Mechanics. Mathematical Physics Monographs. Ben- [24] L. Boltzmann. Uber¨ die mechanische Bedeutung jamin, 1968. des zweiten Hauptsatzes der W¨armetheorie. Wiener [10] S. Smale. Differentiable dynamical systems. Bullettin of Berichte, 53, (W.A.,#2):195–220, (9–33), 1866. the American Mathematical Society, 73:747–818, 1967. [25] R. Clausius. Ueber die Zur¨uckf¨uhrung des zweites Haupt- [11] G. Gallavotti, F. Bonetto, and G. Gentile. Aspects of satzes der mechanischen W¨armetheorie und allgemeine the ergodic, qualitative and statistical theory of motion. mechanische Prinzipien. Annalen der Physik, 142:433– Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2004. 461, 1871. [12] Ya.G. Sinai. Lectures in ergodic theory. Lecture notes [26] L. Boltzmann. Studien ¨uber das gleichgewicht der le- in Mathematics. Princeton University Press, Princeton, bendigen kraft zwischen bewegten materiellen punkten. 1977. Wiener Berichte, 58, (W.A.,#5):517–560, (49–96), 1868. [13] Ya.G. Sinai. Topics in ergodic theory, volume 44 of [27] J. C. Maxwell. On Boltzmann’s theorem on the av- Princeton Mathematical Series. Princeton University erage distribution of energy in a system of material Press, 1994. points. Transactions of the Cambridge Philosophical So- [14] Ya. G. Sinai. Markov partitions and C-diffeomorphisms. ciety, 12:547–575, 1879.

32 33

[28] G. Gallavotti. Ergodicity: a historical perspective. equi- 154:569–601, 1993. librium and nonequilibrium. European Physics Journal [50] G. Gallavotti. The Elements of Mechanics (I edition);. H, 41,:181–259, 2016. Springer Verlag, New York, 1983 [I edition]. [29] D. Ruelle. Positivity of entropy production in nonequilib- [51] G. Gallavotti. Breakdown and regeneration of time re- rium statistical mechanics. Journal of Statistical Physics, versal symmetry in nonequilibrium statistical mechanics. 85:1–25, 1996. Physica D, 112:250–257, 1998. [30] S. de Groot and P. Mazur. Non equilibrium thermody- [52] G. Gallavotti. Dynamical ensembles equivalence in fluid namics. Dover, Mineola, NY, 1984. mechanics. Physica D, 105:163–184, 1997. [31] R.P. Feynman and F.L. Vernon. The theory of a gen- [53] M. Pollicot. Maximal Lyapunov exponents for random eral quantum system interacting with a linear dissipative matrix products. Inventiones Mathematicae, 181:209– system. Annals of Physics, 24:118–173, 1963. 226, 2010. [32] D. J. Evans and G. P. Morriss. Statistical Mechanics of [54] M. Porta. Fluctuation theorem, non linear response Nonequilibrium Fluids. Academic Press, New-York, 1990. and the regularity of time reversal symmetry. Chaos, [33] G. Gallavotti and E. Presutti. Thermodynamic limit for 20:023111, 2010. isokinetic thermostats. Journal of Mathematical Physics, [55] G. Gallavotti. Extension of Onsager’s reciprocity to large 51:0353303 (+9), 2010. fields and the chaotic hypothesis. Physical Review Let- [34] G. Gallavotti. Reversible Anosov diffeomorphisms and ters, 77:4334–4337, 1996. large deviations. Mathematical Physics Electronic Jour- [56] G. Gentile. A large deviation theorem for Anosov flows. nal (MPEJ), 1:1–12, 1995. Forum Mathematicum, 10:89–118, 1998. [35] D. J. Evans, E. G. D. Cohen, and G. P. Morriss. Prob- [57] G. Gallavotti. Chaotic hypothesis: Onsager reciprocity ability of second law violations in shearing steady flows. and fluctuation–dissipation theorem. Journal of Statisti- Physical Review Letters, 71:2401–2404, 1993. cal Physics, 84:899–926, 1996. [36] J. Bricmont and A. Kupiainen. Coupled analytic maps. [58] G. Gallavotti and D. Ruelle. SRB states and nonequili- Nonlinearity, 8:379–396, 1995. brium statistical mechanics close to equilibrium. Com- [37] X.D. Shang, P. Tong, and K.Q. Xia. Test of steady-state munications in Mathematical Physics, 190:279–285, 1997. fluctuation theorem in turbulent rayleigh-bnard convec- [59] S. Carnot. R´eflections sur la puissance motrice du feu tion. Physical Review E, 015301(R):1–4, 2005. et sur les machines propres `ad´evelopper cette puissance. [38] D. Ruelle. Statistical Mechanics. Benjamin, New York, Online in https://gallica.bnf.fr; original Bachelier, 1824; 1969, 1974. reprinted Gabay, 1990., Paris, 1824. [39] O. Lanford and D. Ruelle. Observables at infinity and [60] D. Ruelle. Differentiation of srb states. Communications states with short range correlations in statistical mechan- in Mathematical Physics, 187:227–241, 1997. ics. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 13:194– [61] R. Bowen. Markov partitions for axiom A diffeomor- 215, 1969. phisms. American Journal of Mathematics, 92:725–747, [40] G. Gallavotti. Statistical Mechanics. A short treatise. 1970. Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2000. [62] R. Bowen. Equilibrium states and the ergodic theory of [41] J.C. Maxwell. On the dynamical theory of gases. In: The Anosov diffeormorphisms, volume 470 of Lecture Notes in Scientific Papers of J.C. Maxwell, Cambridge University Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg, 1975. Press, Ed. W.D. Niven, Vol.2, pages 26–78, 1866. [63] V. Franceschini and L. Russo. Stable and unstable [42] Z.S. She and E. Jackson. Constrained Euler system manifolds of the H´enon mapping. Journal of Statistical for Navier-Stokes turbulence. Physical Review Letters, Physics, 25:757–769, 1981. 70:1255–1258, 1993. [64] R. Bowen. Markov partitions are not smooth. Proceedings [43] G. Gallavotti, L. Rondoni, and E. Segre. Lyapunov spec- of the American Mathematical Society, 71:130–132, 1978. tra and nonequilibrium ensembles equivalence in 2d fluid. [65] Ya. G. Sinai. Gibbs measures in ergodic theory. Russian Physica D, 187:358–369, 2004. Mathematical Surveys, 27:21–69, 1972. [44] L. Rondoni and C. Mejia-Monasterio. Fluctuations [66] G. Viavattene, G. Consolini, F. Berrilli, D. Calchetti, in nonequilibrium statistical mechanics: models, math- D. Del Moro, F. Gianattanasio, L. Giacomelli, and ematical theory, physical mechanisms. Nonlinearity, V. Penza. Testing tha steady state fluctuation theorem in 20:R1–R37, 2007. the solar photospheric convection. Preprint, Uniroma2:1– [45] G. Gallavotti and V. Lucarini. Equivalence of Non- 4, 2019. Equilibrium Ensembles and Representation of Friction [67] P. L. Garrido, S. Goldstein, and J. L. Lebowitz. Boltz- in Turbulent Flows: The Lorenz 96 Model. Journal of mann entropy for dense fluids not in local equilibrium. Statistical Physics, 156:1027–10653, 2014. Physical Review Letters, 92:050602 (+4), 2004. [46] L. Biferale, M. Cencini, M. DePietro, G. Gallavotti, and [68] E. Presutti. Scaling limits in Statistical Mechanics and V. Lucarini. Equivalence of non-equilibrium ensembles in Microstructures in Continuum Mechanics. Springer, turbulence models. Physical Review E, 98:012201, 2018. Berlin, 2009. [47] U. Dressler. Symmetry property of the Lyapunov ex- [69] D. Ruelle. Elements of differentiable dynamics and bifur- ponents of a class of dissipative dynamical systems with cation theory. Academic Press, New-York, 1989. viscous damping. Physical Review A, 38:2103–2109, 1988. [70] G. Gallavotti. Equivalence of dynamical ensembles and [48] C. Dettman and G. Morriss. Proof of conjugate pairing Navier Stokes equations. Physics Letters A, 223:91–95, for an isokinetic thermostat. Physical Review E, 53:5545– 1996. 5549, 1996. [71] G. Gallavotti. Non equilibrium in statistical and fluid [49] N. I. Chernov, G. L. Eyink, J. L. Lebowitz, and Ya. G. mechanics. ensembles and their equivalence. entropy Sinai. Steady state electric conductivity in the periodic driven intermittency. Journal of Mathematical Physics, Lorentz gas. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 41:4061–4081, 2000.

33 34

[72] G. Gallavotti. Fluctuations and entropy driven space– [85] D.J. Evans and D. Searles. Equilibrium microstates time intermittency in Navier–Stokes fluids, in Mathemat- which generate second law violating steady state. Phys- ical Physics 2000, Ed. E. Fokas, A. Grigoryan, T. Kibble, ical Review E, 50:1645–1648, 1994. B. Zegarlinski. World Scientific, London, 2000. [86] C. Jarzynski. Nonequilibrium equality for free energy [73] G. Gallavotti. Entropy driven intermittency. Markov difference. Physical Review Letters, 78:2690–2693, 1997. processes and Related fields, 7:135–144, 2001. [87] W. Hoover and C. Griswold. Time reversibility Computer [74] G. Gallavotti. Microscopic chaos and macroscopic en- simulation, and Chaos. Advances in Non Linear Dynam- tropy in fluids. Journal of Statistical Mechanics (JS- ics, vol. 13, 2d edition. World Scientific, Singapore, 1999. TAT), 2006:P10011 (+9), 2006. [88] D. Ruelle. Smooth dynamics and new theoretical ideas [75] C. Marchioro. An example of absence of turbulence for in non-equilibrium statistical mechanics. Journal of Sta- any Reynolds number. Communications in Mathematical tistical Physics, 95:393–468, 1999. Physics, 105:99–106, 1986. [89] G. Gallavotti. Chaotic dynamics, fluctuations, non- [76] D. Baive and V. Franceschini. Symmetry breaking on equilibrium ensembles. Chaos, 8:384–392, 1998. a model of five-mode truncated navier-stokes equations. [90] G. Gallavotti. Chaotic hypothesis and universal large de- Journal of Statistical Physics, 26:471–484, 1980. viations properties. Documenta Mathematica, extra vol- [77] V. Franceschini and C. Tebaldi. Sequences of infinite bi- ume ICM98, vol. I:205–233, 1998. furcations and turbulence in a five-mode truncation of the [91] D. Ruelle and A. Wilkinson. Absolutely singular dynami- Navier-Stokes equations. Journal of Statistical Physics, cal foliations. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 21:707726, 1979. 219:481–487, 2001. [78] V. Franceschini, C. Tebaldi, and F. Zironi. Fixed [92] G. Gallavotti, G. Gentile, and A. Giuliani. Frac- Point Limit Behavior of N-Mode Truncated Navier- tional Lindstedt series. Journal of Mathematical Physics, Stokes Equations as N Increases. Journal of Statistical 47:012702 (+33), 2006. Physics, 35:387–397, 1984. [93] Y.B. Pesin and Y.G. Sinai. Space–time chaos in chains [79] V. Franceschini and C. Tebaldi. Truncations to 12, 14 of weakly inteacting hyperbolic mappimgs. Advances in and 18 modes of the Navier-Stokes equations on a two- Soviet Mathematics, 3:165–198, 1991. dimensional torus. Meccanica, 20:207–230, 1985. [94] J. Bricmont and A. Kupiainen. Infinite dimensional srb [80] V. Franceschini and C. Giberti nd M. Nicolini. Common measures. Physica D, 103:18–33, 1997. Periodic Behavior in larger and larger yruncations of the [95] G. Gallavotti. A local fluctuation theorem. Physica A, Navier-Stokes. Journal of Statistical Physics, 50:879–896, 263:39–50, 1999. 1988. [96] K. Sato, K Sekimoto, T. Hondou, and F. Takagi. Irre- [81] V. Franceschini and C. Giberti. Qualitative and versibility resulting from contact with a heat bath caused Quantitative Stabilized Behavior of Truncated Two- by the finiteness of the system. Physical Review E, Dimensional Navier-Stokes Equations. Theoretical and 66:016119+6, 2002. Computational Fluid Dynamics, 2:185–192, 1991. [97] V. Arnold. Sur la g´eom´etrie diff´erentielle des groupes [82] D. Ruelle. Large volume limit of the distribution of char- de Lie de dimension infinie et ses applications `a acteristic exponents in turbulence. Communications in l’hydrodynamique des fluides parfaits. Annales de lin- Mathematical Physics, 87:287–302, 1982. stitut Fourier, 16:319–361, 1966. [83] E. Lieb. On characteristic exponents in turbulence. Com- [98] T. Tao. The Euler-Arnold equation. Expository sec- munications in Mathematical Physics, 92:473–480, 1984. tions, https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2010/06/07/the- [84] G. Gallavotti. Navier-stokes equation: irreversibility tur- euler-arnold-equation:1–15, 2010. bulence and ensembles equivalence. arXiv:1902.09610, 1902:09160, 2019.

34