Originally posted by sasquatch672ROFL
Read the thread and nothing satisfied me, so here we go: what we know as temperature is actually a level of atomic activity. Temperature actually measures the amount of atomic vibrations in a given space. Scientists have actually achieved temperatures four millionths of a degree above absolute zero. As long as there is mass - any mass, and keep in m ...[text shortened]... e - absolute zero is unattainable. You can approach it asymptotically but you can't get there.
If you read the thread You'd know that the whole issue was finished with a while back.
According to kinetic theory there would be no movement of individual particles at absolute zero, and thus any material at this temperature would be solid. This contradicts experimental evidence. A more practical definition of absolute zero is as the temperature where no further energy may be extracted. For the case of free atoms at temperatures approaching absolute zero, most of the energy is in the form of translational motion and the temperature can be measured in terms of the distribution of this motion, with slower speeds corresponding to lower temperatures.
In fact because of quantum mechanical effects, the speed at absolute zero is not exactly zero, but depends, as does the energy, on the volume within which the atom is confined. At absolute zero, the molecules and atoms in a system are all in the ground state (i.e., the lowest possible energy state) and the system has the least possible amount of kinetic energy allowed by the laws of physics. This minimum energy corresponds to the zero-point energy encountered in the quantum mechanical particle in a box problem. As emphasised above, the lowest possible energy is not necessarily zero energy, owing to the ramifications of quantum theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_zero
Tada
Originally posted by XanthosNZYour site proves my point. Since you will never see molecue motion stopped, you will never see absolute zero.
According to kinetic theory there would be no movement of individual particles at absolute zero, and thus any material at this temperature would be solid. This contradicts experimental evidence. A more practical definition of absolute zero is as the temperature where no further energy may be extracted. For the case of free atoms at temperatures approaching ...[text shortened]... ng to the ramifications of quantum theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_zero
Tada
Here is a site, that will explain to you how it works, (I had to choose a kids site so you can understand it 😛)
http://yahooligans.yahoo.com/content/science/brainpop/movie?id=temperature
Edit: Tada
Originally posted by flyUnityIn fact because of quantum mechanical effects, the speed at absolute zero is not exactly zero, but depends, as does the energy, on the volume within which the atom is confined. At absolute zero, the molecules and atoms in a system are all in the ground state (i.e., the lowest possible energy state) and the system has the least possible amount of kinetic energy allowed by the laws of physics. This minimum energy corresponds to the zero-point energy encountered in the quantum mechanical particle in a box problem. As emphasised above, the lowest possible energy is not necessarily zero energy, owing to the ramifications of quantum theory.
Your site proves my point. Since you will never see molecue motion stopped, you will never see absolute zero.
Here is a site, that will explain to you how it works, (I had to choose a kids site so you can understand it 😛)
http://yahooligans.yahoo.com/content/science/brainpop/movie?id=temperature
Edit: Tada
Originally posted by XanthosNZYou are correct, I was just responding to you when you stated that 0 Kelvin has some molecule motion, when in fact it dont.
In fact because of quantum mechanical effects, [b]the speed at absolute zero is not exactly zero, but depends, as does the energy, on the volume within which the atom is confined. At absolute zero, the molecules and atoms in a system are all in the ground state (i.e., the lowest possible energy state) and the system has the least possible amount of kin ...[text shortened]... st possible energy is not necessarily zero energy, owing to the ramifications of quantum theory.[/b]
Originally posted by flyUnityNo motion means no energy
You are correct, I was just responding to you when you stated that 0 Kelvin has some molecule motion, when in fact it dont.
Absolute zero is the ground state for all molecules.
Ground state does not imply no energy.
Therefore at absolute zero there can be molecule motion.
Where am I going wrong?
EDIT: It don't?
Originally posted by XanthosNZI was thinking, Everything decays at the same rate regardless of tempurature (I think). IF Scientist can somehow make a substance 0 Kelvin where there is no molecule motion, would the decay rate change? or would it even decay since there is no heat?
No motion means no energy
Absolute zero is the ground state for all molecules.
Ground state does not imply no energy.
Therefore at absolute zero there can be molecule motion.
Where am I going wrong?
EDIT: It don't?
This is probaly a stupid question.
Originally posted by XanthosNZThe ramification is mainly the uncertainty principle:
In fact because of quantum mechanical effects, [b]the speed at absolute zero is not exactly zero, but depends, as does the energy, on the volume within which the atom is confined. At absolute zero, the molecules and atoms in a system are all in the ground state (i.e., the lowest possible energy state) and the system has the least possible amount of kin ...[text shortened]... st possible energy is not necessarily zero energy, owing to the ramifications of quantum theory.[/b]
even at 'absolute zero', there is a tiny amount of molecular vibration
but which still represents the lowest energy level achievable in that
sytsem. Any attempt to lower the average kinetic energy (molecular
vibration) will raise the average energy level and therefore the system
will not be at absolute zero any more.
Originally posted by sonhouseWell thanks for repeating what my source says.
The ramification is mainly the uncertainty principle:
even at 'absolute zero', there is a tiny amount of molecular vibration
but which still represents the lowest energy level achievable in that
sytsem. Any attempt to lower the average kinetic energy (molecular
vibration) will raise the average energy level and therefore the system
will not be at absolute zero any more.
- Joined
- 26 Apr 03
- Moves
- 26771
If I owned a box of very cold particles they would still be orbiting the sun at quite a rate and going away from the centre of the universe very quickly as well. I could even stick them in the back of my car and drive up to 70mph without breaking any laws. I don't see how all this motion would mean they weren't at absolute zero.
Originally posted by flyUnityYou got it. The reason you are stuck on this concept is this: absolute zero is a classical physics concept where they THOUGHT all movement
I know that absolute 0 is unatainable, I never said otherwise. But are you still arguing that 0 Kelvin has molecular vibration? Yes or no
stopped at 0.00000K but quantum theory blows that out of the
water. There is still a bit of wiggle at absolute zero and any attempt
to make it totally zero is doomed to failure.
You know ( I guess you know anyway) the uncertainty principle says
you can find the position of a particle with absolute precision but at
the expense of tallying its energy with equal precision, or
you can find the absolute energy but at the expense of of knowing its
position with equal precision but not both at the same time.