Original post by sonhouse, 10 Feb '12 17:55

- 11 Feb '12 08:21I think the answer you seek is 0 K.

Outside my window the ratio has been uncomfortably close to one a few times this winter.. the downside of living next door to Santa.Who doesn't live on the North Pole, it's just disinformation given by the elves so that the big man can work in peace. - 11 Feb '12 13:48Your box has nothing in it, nothing comes up.
*Originally posted by talzamir***[hidden]I think the answer you seek is 0 K.[/hidden]**

Outside my window the ratio has been uncomfortably close to one a few times this winter.. the downside of living next door to Santa. [hidden]Who doesn't live on the North Pole, it's just disinformation given by the elves so that the big man can work in peace.[/hidden] - 11 Feb '12 19:01Pretty close, 1.728. I saw there was a range where only one temperature would have a particular ratio, on the positive C side, the numbers asymptote towards 1.8 but on the negative side, since -273.15 is absolute zero, the ratio can't get to 1.8. It can if you allow say -300,000 C, which of course is a nonsense number.
*Originally posted by joe shmo***I'm going to say no such ratio can exist, but close enough happens @ -26.2 C**

I was just playing with my casio calculator which has the C-F and F-C conversions and saw you could specify a ratio that would only work on the negative C side. - 11 Feb '12 19:24When I said
*Originally posted by sonhouse***Pretty close, 1.728. I saw there was a range where only one temperature would have a particular ratio, on the positive C side, the numbers asymptote towards 1.8 but on the negative side, since -273.15 is absolute zero, the ratio can't get to 1.8. It can if you allow say -300,000 C, which of course is a nonsense number.**

I was just playing with my casio ca ...[text shortened]... F-C conversions and saw you could specify a ratio that would only work on the negative C side.

(C/F) =/= Sqrt(3)

Is because the irrational sqrt(3) cannot be expressed as the ratio of two integers - 14 Feb '12 01:42 :: 2 edits9C/5+32=F

C=160/(5F/C-9)

F=160/(5-9C/F)

I think temperature is a measure of the square of the average speed of a group of particles. As long as the particle speed can be irrational temperature can therefore be irrational, so this depends on whether speed is quantised or not.

Since there is no consensus on whether time and distance are quantised, nobody knows for sure whether speed is quantised, and so nobody knows whether an irrational temperature is possible. - 14 Feb '12 02:01 :: 1 editInteresting point with regard to temperature. You can measuire irrational lengths though for instance by using diagonals of rectangles with rational dimensions. Maybe I will have a word with the physics department see if they can come up with a plan (problem is they always want to round to a reasonable degree of accuracy).
*Originally posted by joe shmo***But can you measure irrational values?** - 14 Feb '12 15:18There is no mening to measure irrational values of temperatures. But this doesn't mean that irrational values of temperatures doesn't exist.
*Originally posted by deriver69***Interesting point with regard to temperature. You can measuire irrational lengths though for instance by using diagonals of rectangles with rational dimensions. Maybe I will have a word with the physics department see if they can come up with a plan (problem is they always want to round to a reasonable degree of accuracy).**

When a temp of 3 degree rises to 4 degrees, then every real value in between has been passed during the process. Even exactly pi degrees. Not for long though. - 14 Feb '12 17:06Can you imagine the circuitry needed to make a temperature exactly PI C?
*Originally posted by FabianFnas***There is no mening to measure irrational values of temperatures. But this doesn't mean that irrational values of temperatures doesn't exist.**

When a temp of 3 degree rises to 4 degrees, then every real value in between has been passed during the process. Even exactly pi degrees. Not for long though.