The Approach to Equilibrium - gui dávid

← writing

Coffee cools on a table and never gathers heat from the room until it is steaming again. An egg breaks into a pan, its yolk and white stirred into streaks, and the streaks never climb back into a smooth shell. A deck is shuffled, and although no card has vanished, the crisp order that once ran from ace to king does not reassemble itself in one miraculous cut. A smell released in the corner of a room spreads outward and does not later collect itself into the bottle. The past leaves traces everywhere, but the past itself does not return.

This is the everyday arrow of time. It is not an abstract philosophical ornament placed on physics after the fact. It is the asymmetry we live inside: melting rather than unmelting, mixing rather than unmixing, forgetting rather than spontaneously remembering. And then comes the old difficulty, still sharp each time I meet it. The microscopic laws underneath these events do not seem to contain such an arrow. The equations for molecules, fields, and particles run backward as well as forward. Reverse all the velocities in an ideal movie of the molecules in a cooling cup, and the equations do not object. Nothing in the microscopic rule says that one temporal direction is the proper one.

I can write that down. I can prove the small version of it. I can make the machine run backward in front of my eyes. And something in me still refuses to accept what the proof is saying without flinching. The refusal is not mathematical. The mathematics is clean. The trouble is that the world made by the mathematics looks as if it has forgotten itself, and then the mathematics calmly says no, nothing was forgotten. That calmness is part of what I find maddening.

So why does time point one way? Or, stated with less grandeur and more danger, why do reversible laws so often give us irreversible-looking lives? The question is easy to ruin by making it too vague. I want a toy world where every microscopic detail is visible, every update can be checked, and the whole motion can be reversed on command. A line of black and white cells is the cleanest toy model I know for exactly this puzzle. It is a stripped-down stand-in for reversible microscopic physics: a world whose law has no preferred direction, yet whose visible history looks like an approach to equilibrium.

I also want one object to follow, otherwise the whole business becomes too smooth. Near the top of the picture there is a sparse, almost-white row, a little scatter of black cells against the white. It is not important because it is large. It is important because it is legible. You can point at it. You can say, there, that piece. Then the rule starts, and the question becomes sharp enough to hurt: after the scatter has been swallowed by the woven noise below, could it ever climb back out?

I want to begin with the picture, because the picture is doing much of the thinking for us before any words have a chance to get in the way, and because there is a small danger, in a subject like this, that the formal language will make the phenomenon seem more remote than it is. The phenomenon is right there: a few marks at the top, a spreading tangle underneath, and a strange feeling that something irreversible has happened on a page made by a rule that will turn out to be reversible.

Take a line of cells, each cell black or white. Start with a row that is almost all white, with a few black cells scattered through it. Now apply one fixed rule again and again, drawing each new row underneath the previous one, so that time becomes vertical and the future accumulates downward on the page. This is one of the pleasures of cellular automata: time, which in life is something one inhabits, becomes a visible direction, and the history of a system becomes a texture one can inspect with the eye.

Time runs downward. The top row is the start: almost all white, with a few black cells. Each row beneath it is one step of the rule.

The change starts at once. There is no long quiet prelude in which the black cells wait politely for the rest of the row to notice them. Each black cell opens into a widening diagonal wedge, as if it has been given a small local alphabet with which to write across time. The wedges cross, interfere, and tangle; after only a few dozen rows the lower part has become a dense woven fabric, a coarse tartan of diagonals that the eye reads as static. If I hid the top and showed you one row from near the bottom, you would call it random, and the row itself would give you no easy way to recover your mistake.

There is a detail in the picture that is easy to miss because the whole lower region has the air of undifferentiated noise. The pattern is not a smooth grey fog. It is woven. It contains slanting strands, collisions, small rhombi, repeated fragments, then fragments of fragments. The eye can follow a line for a while, then loses it where other lines pass through. The little scatter does not...