If absolute Zero Exists...

[lifeguard_man]

Then is there an absolute maximum amount of energy a particle can withhold or emit?

Is there a limit for the Kalvin scale?

[onemoreround]

*Kelvin

[lifeguard_man]

*Kelvin

I knew someone would comment on that, i was to lazy to change it.

I looked on wikipedia and the temperature of the universe moments after the big bang was 1.417x10^32 K. That has to be the highest possible attainable energy?

[onemoreround]

I knew someone would comment on that, i was to lazy to change it.

I looked on wikipedia and the temperature of the universe moments after the big bang was 1.417x10^32 K. That has to be the highest possible attainable energy?

Highest concentration of active moving particles = highest temperature, so yes. That sounds right.

PV=nrT

[Heisman2]

That's a question I've had for a long time. I don't know how to answer it. I would assume since particles cannot move faster than the speed of light then there should be some theoretical maximum temperature, but if relativistic effects come into play I'm completely lost as to how to approach trying to figure it out.

[wapacmane]

The principal quantum number corresponding to the energy level of an atom in principle can reach inifinity n=1,2,3,4...., thus a threshold is the entirety of entirety.

As for absolute zero, it does not seem possible from current observations. the kelvin scale is only a model based on human perceptions and logic, which would explain absolute zero and infinity in abstract concepts, but the validity of their objectiveness is still in limbo.

personally, as long as there is existence, absolute zero can not be reached.

I knew someone would comment on that, i was to lazy to change it.

I looked on wikipedia and the temperature of the universe moments after the big bang was 1.417x10^32 K. That has to be the highest possible attainable energy?

you also have to take into consideration the temperature of the big bang before its rapid inflation. This value would have to be exponentially higher than the value during or after inflation phase.

[wapacmane]

That's a question I've had for a long time. I don't know how to answer it. I would assume since particles cannot move faster than the speed of light then there should be some theoretical maximum temperature, but if relativistic effects come into play I'm completely lost as to how to approach trying to figure it out.

speed is only one factor contributing to temperature, mass, pressure and volume must also be taken into consideration.

[lifeguard_man]

The principal quantum number corresponding to the energy level of an atom in principle can reach inifinity n=1,2,3,4...., thus a threshold is the entirety of entirety.

As for absolute zero, it does not seem possible from current observations. the kelvin scale is only a model based on human perceptions and logic, which would explain absolute zero and infinity in abstract concepts, but the validity of their objectiveness is still in limbo.

personally, as long as there is existence, absolute zero can not be reached.



you also have to take into consideration the temperature of the big bang before its rapid inflation. This value would have to be exponentially higher than the value during or after inflation phase.

Awesome post! Thanks for some theory on this. I am literally jizzing in my pants over this new section on the misc.

[wapacmane]

Short Answer is: There doesnt seem to be, no.




Ya it helps to know that to reach absolute zero the particle needs to have 0 energy. So asking questions like how come there is a 0 temperature or a negative temperature are sorta loose their meaning.

This should be of interest btw:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_...temperature%29

indeed, your particle with 0 energy value means that there is no particle. absolute zero corresponds to nothingness/non-existent. And since we thrive in existence derived from all that exists, absolute zero appears to be a blunt contradiction to physical reality. In essence, there can't be nothing when there is something.

[wrestle445]

its exists theoretically

[lifeguard_man]

its exists theoretically

at what point?

[wapacmane]

its exists theoretically

now you are venturing into the primordial debate that is the dualism of mind and matter, that is, abstractions of the mind including emotions, ideas and believes actually exist in a materialist universe? Is there a separation between the mind and the physical brain?

many argue for the non-existence of conscious mental states such as pain, visual perceptions, emotions and believes and that includes your theory of absolute zero.have no coherent neural basis and are poorly defined

[CLEAN_SET_OF_10]

at what point?

theoretically if the universe or a closed system reaches maximum entropy, absolute zero will be achieved. this postulation is known as "the big freeze". however they now think white dwarf stars can stay "warm" for trillions of years. and this is a hypothetical scenario because it is unlikely that matter will be spread uniformly (nothing is going to magically destroy frozen chunks of ice and asteroids, and stray planets, etc. which is critical to attain maximum entropy). so the more and more you look at it, absolute zero isn't really obtainable unless black holes devour all matter in the universe and spit it out as radiation. even then there might not be a uniform distribution of particles. you see where i'm going with this.

i'm actually going to say its impossible to create absolute zero conditions. even in a vacuum closed system particles appear out of nothingness, smash together and annihilate causing fluctuations in the systems entropy.

[Dude.Jon]

i'm actually going to say its impossible to create absolute zero conditions. even in a vacuum closed system particles appear out of nothingness, smash together and annihilate causing fluctuations in the systems entropy.

care to explain? Or has this only been hypothesized?

[wapacmane]

heoretically if the universe or a closed system reaches maximum entropy, absolute zero will be achieved. this postulation is known as "the big freeze". however they now think white dwarf stars can stay "warm" for trillions of years. and this is a hypothetical scenario because it is unlikely that matter will be spread uniformly (nothing is going to magically destroy frozen chunks of ice and asteroids, and stray planets, etc. which is critical to attain maximum entropy). so the more and more you look at it, absolute zero isn't really obtainable unless black holes devour all matter in the universe and spit it out as radiation. even then there might not be a uniform distribution of particles. you see where i'm going with this.

i'm actually going to say its impossible to create absolute zero conditions. even in a vacuum closed system particles appear out of nothingness, smash together and annihilate causing fluctuations in the systems entropy.

maxium entropy is not absolute zero, rather it conveys to a state of thermal equilibrium in a system. This is also known as "heat death" where none usable energy remains, but this is a drastic contrast to absolute zero where no energy exists. A system/universe in the state of thermal equilibrium would have temperature value that infinitely approach 0k but never reach it. absolute zero will not be achieved.

[wapacmane]

care to explain? Or has this only been hypothesized?

this has been observationally proven, empty space is only a pseudo vacuum veiled by the emergence and the disappearance of virtual particles. It is the basis for the phenomenon of hawking radiation/hawing paradox where radiation are emitted and can be detected from black holes.

[Lunatic]

Highest concentration of active moving particles = highest temperature, so yes. That sounds right.

PV=nrT

You have NO IDEA how happy I am I don't have to do Chemistry anymore. OMFG


How badass would it be if we reached absolute zero in temperature?

[SupaHeavy]

You have NO IDEA how happy I am I don't have to do Chemistry anymore. OMFG


How badass would it be if we reached absolute zero in temperature?

im just waiting for the term to finish and i wont do it anymore aswell.
i feel your hate.

[IanR1205]

Awesome post! Thanks for some theory on this. I am literally jizzing in my pants over this new section on the misc.

I really hope you are using the word "literally" incorrectly here.

[MiKey4]

Are you asking if there is a maximum temperature?


There is a lot of discussion on this and I don't think the answer is clear.

If you get enough photons in a box you can have as high a temperature as you want, but some weird physics happens (and you might run out of photons to fill the box with). Above 1 MeV you get electron pair production, etc. So there are big complications from fundamental physics.

Same with matter- in a simple model you will just heat a gas, but after so much heating the molecule will (effectively) vibrate and spin so fast that it breaks apart into its constituent protons and neutrons.


disclaimer- ignore everything I said, I am just talking random physics I learnt, but don't take any of this as true, just interpretations of a student.
There are big practical and fundamental limitations, in my opinion.

[Heisman2]

speed is only one factor contributing to temperature, mass, pressure and volume must also be taken into consideration.

I'm aware; I figured they would all come into play with relativistic effects at some level. I don't know, though.

Would the energy approach some limit as the principal quantum number continually increased? I'm just imagining that as the energy got way up there some more exotic types of physics would occur. Perhaps not, though.

[MiKey4]

Would the energy approach some limit as the principal quantum number continually increased? I'm just imagining that as the energy got way up there some more exotic types of physics would occur. Perhaps not, though.

Yep. It depends on stuff but the J number for example (total angular momentum of a rotating molecule- very closely related to temperature) cannot go up endlessly because at enough energy the electrons disassociate (~ 15 eV), nuclei disassociate (~ GeV), etc. And the quantum numbers don't exist anymore.

[lifeguard_man]

You have NO IDEA how happy I am I don't have to do Chemistry anymore. OMFG


How badass would it be if we reached absolute zero in temperature?

You can't do chemistry if the world is so cold particles are no longer vibrating. Of course that is impossible so we will still have to love PV = nRT

[NeoSeminole]

theoretically if the universe or a closed system reaches maximum entropy, absolute zero will be achieved. this postulation is known as "the big freeze".

someone can correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure entropy in a closed system refers to the accumulation of thermal energy (basically the least usable form of energy). If the universe reaches a state of maximum entropy, there would still be heat but it would become evenly distributed across the vastness of space. So the universe would seem very cold but not 0 K

[lifeguard_man]

someone can correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure entropy in a closed system refers to the accumulation of thermal energy (basically the least usable form of energy). If the universe reaches a state of maximum entropy, there would still be heat but it would become evenly distributed across the vastness of space. So the universe would seem very cold but not 0 K

Isn't maximum entropy the same as a system being at equilibrium?

[Heisman2]

Yep. It depends on stuff but the J number for example (total angular momentum of a rotating molecule- very closely related to temperature) cannot go up endlessly because at enough energy the electrons disassociate (~ 15 eV), nuclei disassociate (~ GeV), etc. And the quantum numbers don't exist anymore.

Haha, I actually knew the answer to the question; I just wanted to see how he would respond. That's one of the two reasons an anharmonic oscillator is used to generate models for certain types of spectroscopy, like IR. The other is that as atoms and their constiuents get closer together different forces come into play. Reps anyway, though.

[Heisman2]

You can't do chemistry if the world is so cold particles are no longer vibrating. Of course that is impossible so we will still have to love PV = nRT

Actually, due to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, particles always vibrate, or at least move in some fashion. Here's a link that explains it a bit: http://www.calphysics.org/zpe.html

[lifeguard_man]

Actually, due to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, particles always vibrate, or at least move in some fashion. Here's a link that explains it a bit: http://www.calphysics.org/zpe.html

How is this even possible? If absolute zero is no movement or energy in the molecule. How can vibrations still be occurring. Practically there is always vibration, but theoretically at 0K how can vibration still be occurring?

BRB looking at link ! thanks.

[Heisman2]

How is this even possible? If absolute zero is no movement or energy in the molecule. How can vibrations still be occurring. Practically there is always vibration, but theoretically at 0K how can vibration still be occurring?

BRB looking at link ! thanks.

If the HUP says we can't know the position and momentum of a particle with complete accuracy than a particle that can be located has to have movement of some type.

I should state also that everything I say comes from a chemistry, not physics, background, so I'm probably not rigorously correct in my assertions.

[MiKey4]

A particle that is located doesn't have to have movement, it has to have uncertainty in movement. The actual momentum of it is unobservable either way, but will have a nonzero probability density of also being stationary.