Time evolution of nonadditive entropies: The logistic map

TL;DR

This paper investigates the time evolution of both additive and nonadditive entropies in the logistic map, revealing how entropy overshoot behaviors depend on chaos levels and questioning traditional assumptions about the second law of thermodynamics.

Contribution

It demonstrates the distinct entropy dynamics at the edge of chaos and in fully chaotic regimes, highlighting the importance of nonadditive entropy in complex systems.

Findings

Entropy overshoots above stationary value in all cases.

Overshoot diminishes as phase space partition increases in chaotic regimes.

At the edge of chaos, entropy diverges monotonically, challenging classical thermodynamic assumptions.

Abstract

Due to the second principle of thermodynamics, the time dependence of entropy for all kinds of systems under all kinds of physical circumstances always thrives interest. The logistic map $x_{t+1}=1-a x_t^2 \in [-1,1]\;(a\in [0,2])$ is neither large, since it has only one degree of freedom, nor closed, since it is dissipative. It exhibits, nevertheless, a peculiar time evolution of its natural entropy, which is the additive Boltzmann-Gibbs-Shannon one, $S_{BG}=-\sum_{i=1}^W p_i \ln p_i$, for all values of $a$ for which the Lyapunov exponent is positive, and the nonadditive one $S_q= \frac{1-\sum_{i=1}^W p_i^q}{q-1}$ with $q=0.2445\dots$ at the edge of chaos, where the Lyapunov exponent vanishes, $W$ being the number of windows of the phase space partition. We numerically show that, for increasing time, the phase-space-averaged entropy overshoots above its stationary-state value in all cases. However, when $W\to\infty$, the overshooting gradually disappears for the most chaotic case ($a=2$), whereas, in remarkable contrast, it appears to monotonically diverge at the Feigenbaum point ($a=1.4011\dots$). Consequently, the stationary-state entropy value is achieved from {\it above}, instead of from {\it below}, as it could have been a priori expected. These results raise the question whether the usual requirements -- large, closed, and for generic initial conditions -- for the second principle validity might be necessary but not sufficient.