Closest to Absolute Zero

[wormholeman]

Absolutely nothing? are you serious?

 

that is interesting. But it is also abit scarey.

[wormholeman]

Ahh but wait..Zero (0) is nothing. Zero Kelvin (0k) is something.

[Klaynos]

Temperature is a statistical measure of something, if there is nothing there then there is no something of which you can apply the statistical argument so no temperature, it is like saying I have a box inside this box tehre is nothing how fast is that nothing moving? There is nothing there so it can't have a speed. Temperature is an attribute of an ensemble, as velocity is an attribute of a particle.

[Daecon]

what about vacuum, can that be said to have a temperature, or does there have to be something, energy or molecules to move to generate that temperature?

[Klaynos]

what about vacuum, can that be said to have a temperature, or does there have to be something, energy or molecules to move to generate that temperature?

 

 

There has to be an ensemble of atoms to have a temperature. Although in a vacuume there is constantly particle/anti-particle pairs being created and then anihillating with each other...

[silkworm]

There is nothing there so it can't have a speed.

 

And if you truly have nothing its temperature is 0K. If there's nothing there's no motion, no mass, no energy. It is 0K.

 

Absolutely nothing? are you serious?

 

that is interesting. But it is also abit scarey.

 

Yeah' date=' I'm serious. It shouldn't be scary. Lord Kelvin developed the Kelvin scale and projected 0K to be where all gases condense, but it is also the theoretical point at which all molecular motion stops. It shouldn't be scary because 0K is like 0 on a number line of only positive numbers. It's just nothing. The scale can go up infinitely though, to whatever the temperture would be of a single particle subjected to all of the energy in the universe. You can't make an object 0K because you'd have to destroy its mass in the process, which is not possible.

 

Lord Kelvin (1824-1907), a Scottish physicist and mathematician calculated that molecular motion stops at -273 deg C. He called this temperature absolute zero, the lowest possible temperature. A prodigy in mathematics, Kelvin gained his greatest renown in thermodynamics.

http://www.phy.hr/~dpaar/fizicari/kelvin.html

 

At the beginning of the 1800s, a relationship was discovered between the volume and the temperature of a gas. This relationship suggests that the volume of a gas should become zero at a temperature of -273.15oC. In 1848 the British physicist William Thompson, who later became Lord Kelvin, suggested that this observation could be used as the basis for an absolute temperature scale. On the Kelvin scale, absolute zero (0 K) is the temperature at which the volume of a gas becomes zero. It is therefore the lowest possible temperature, or the absolute zero on any temperature scale. Zero on the Kelvin scale is therefore -273.15ºC.

 

http://chemed.chem.purdue.edu/genchem/history/kelvin.html

 

http://www.enchantedlearning.com/chemistry/glossary/Kelvin.shtml

 

It's 0K. It's the base. It's the temperature of nothing. It's the lowest temperature there is and there can be no lower because it is the temperature of nothing. You can't make something 0K because it is the temperature of nothing. 0K only can exist in Nowheresville, outside the reach of the electromagnetic radiation (which has been expanding at the speed of light (the theoretical physical limit for velocity in the universe) ever since the Big Bang (if you dig that theory)). Nowheresville is still a part of nature because it is with us, but not a part of our universe because it is outside of the reach of electromagnetic radiation and we can never go there (or even measure it) without making it part of our own universe, thus eliminating its nothingness and putting into a state where it will never be nothing again (unless we find a way to evacuate it without taking forever, which I have no clue as to how). Hopefully I'm expressing myself well enough.

[wormholeman]

"You can't make something 0K because it is the temperature of nothing"

Ya, but I wouldn't jump to conclusions.

"a Scottish physicist and mathematician calculated that molecular motion stops at -273 deg C. He called this temperature absolute zero, the lowest possible temperature."

 

Notice how Lord kelvin say's "lowest possible temperature".

[silkworm]

Notice how Lord kelvin say's "lowest possible temperature".

 

It is the lowest possible temperature because it is the temperature of nothing. The lowest possible number that is a positive number line (just like the Kelvin scale) is 0 because it is the number of nothing.

[wormholeman]

Yes it is the number of nothing, but it dose not mean zero kelvin has

no temperature.

 

Someone help me here..

[wormholeman]

just like the blonde guy said:

 

" So that is as cold as the atoms can be. We call that Absolute Zero.

 

I get it! When the atoms are all stopped the gas is ABSOLUTELY as cold as can be!

 

Yes, and that is really cold. The thermometer shows a comparison of the Absolute (also known as the Kelvin) and Fahrenheit scales of temperature. Absolute Zero is -459 degrees Fahrenheit. "

[Jacques]

To have no motion/energy you would have to destroy the mass in an object which is impossible,

Temperature is the mesurement of the average speed of the molecules or atoms. Going down to 0K you slow down the molecules or atoms. At 0K mass won't be destroyed, will only get a bunch of molecules or atoms sitting there without any speed.

[silkworm]

I get it! When the atoms are all stopped the gas is ABSOLUTELY as cold as can be!

 

Yes' date=' and that is really cold. The thermometer shows a comparison of the Absolute (also known as the Kelvin) and Fahrenheit scales of temperature. Absolute Zero is -459 degrees Fahrenheit. "[/quote']

 

Don't look at as cold, look at it as heat. There is no cold, there is only heat. Something being colder than something else just means it has less heat. Kelvin is the absolute scale so 0K is no heat, meaning that is the coldest temperature. 0K is the temperature of nothing because you can't make an object 0K because for an object to be 0K it must be void of all energy, which isn't possible because it has mass.

 

Temperature is the mesurement of the average speed of the molecules or atoms. Going down to 0K you slow down the molecules or atoms. At 0K mass won't be destroyed, will only get a bunch of molecules or atoms sitting there without any speed.

 

I'm not saying that you will destroy the mass of an object by taking it to 0K, I'm saying that you can't take an object to 0K because it has mass. You can't destroy mass and you can't achieve 0K on an object. It can only be done on nothing.

[Jacques]

to be 0K it must be void of all energy

More precisely void of kinetic energy.

you can't take an object to 0K because it has mass.

Can you explain why ?

Thanks

[Daecon]

Mass always has energy, things at 0K have NO energy. At all.

 

Therefore you can't have mass at 0K because you can't have any mass with NO energy.

 

The magnetic reations between protons and electrons, quarks, etc. are all energy, therefore an atom can't not have energy, and therefore can't *not* have zero temperature.

 

Would that be accurate?

[wormholeman]

Well I'm going with the blonde guy on this one.

[Jacques]

Temperature is not defined with the internal energy of atoms. Temperature is defined by the kinetic energy of atoms, the motion of atoms. The internal energy of atoms are not part of temperature definition.

[Daecon]

Ah, right. Dosn't magnetic interaction within the atom give rise to kinetic movement?

[wormholeman]

Temperature is not defined with the internal energy of atoms. Temperature is defined by the kinetic [/u'] energy of atoms, the motion of atoms. The internal energy of atoms are not part of temperature definition.

 

So Silkworm and you are trying to say that, Aboslute zero is

when there is total void and theres absolutely nothing no temprature

no heat and not as cold as it can be.

 

I get it.

[wormholeman]

@ Silkworm -I don't get why you want me to think of it as heat, you did already say that

there would be nothing.

[Jacques]

The only thing I wanted to point out is that temperature is a mesure of kinetic energy of atoms. I don't know exactly what you mean by

magnetic interaction within the atom

, you may be rightt or wrong I am not expert enought to answer you . I also want to point out that to my understanding, it is impossible to have something at 0K.

[Daecon]

I meant the way the charges of the Electron^- and the Proton⁺ act against each other.

[Jacques]

Maybe I see a little bit what you mean, the internal motion of charges (quark charge ??) inside particle causing vibration in the magnetic field that propagate to other particle... I think it make sense. Like I said I don't think absolute 0K can be reached.

[Daecon]

Well the way the electron orbits the proton, would it not induce some small "wiggle" in the proton as the electron moves about it?

[Jacques]

Your using the Bhor atomic model and I don't think it's the best model to deal with motion at this scale but I am sure that an atom can't be motionless. Stationary relative to what ? We are on a spinning ball circling the sun, circling the Milkyway nucleus...

[Xyph]

Stationary relative to the measuring apparatus.