It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

# Absolute Zero = Nonexistent

page: 1
3
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 09:10 PM
Hey guys so I've been thinking about this concept for a while now and thought i would get some discussion going on it because i find it really interesting.
Everything that exists in our universe is vibrating at different frequencies. All the things that make up our physical universe are vibrating at the lower end of this "spectrum", and something like sound or light is obviously vibrating at a higher frequency.
when it comes to physical matter, like water for example, you can change the vibration of it to a certain extent. Let's say you heat up the water. You are putting energy into the water molecules and therefore, the molecules start moving around and begin colliding with each other. When you cool it on the other hand, the opposite happens. the molecules begin to organize and fit together and begin to become a solid. This is why water compresses when it becomes ice.

Absolute zero is the theoretical temperature at which entropy reaches its minimum value. The laws of thermodynamics state that absolute zero cannot be reached using only thermodynamic means.

By international agreement, absolute zero is defined as 0K on the Kelvin scale and as −273.15°C on the Celsius scale.[1] This equates to −459.67°F on the Fahrenheit scale. Scientists have achieved temperatures very close to absolute zero, where matter exhibits quantum effects such as superconductivity and superfluidity.

Quoted from wikipedia (the best source for information)
So, what I'm getting at here is that cooling something to the point of absolute zero would be impossible because Anything that exists has to have some vibration. even when the scientists cooled things close to the temp of 0K the matter was still vibrating, even if it was very minimal. Since matter cannot be destroyed or created, absolute zero would not be achievable, because that would mean that it takes matter out of existence.
So, I'd love to hear your views on this, and please correct me on anything if i am wrong. I am no genius so I could very well have no idea what im talking about.
What do you guys think? would something pop out of existence if cooled to absolute zero?

posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 09:22 PM
I know very little about this subject. Ive always heard that achieving it would cause the molecules of what ever it was that they froze to the AZ temp would cease to move. I dont know just seems to me that if they achieved that temp really nothing would happen- what ever it was would just be frozen- completely. fwiw- they have achieved temps within 1 billionth of AZ- not sure what would have achieved that one more billionth of a degree

posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 09:28 PM

I think you may be correct by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. A perfectly still particle would have an exact location and exactly zero velocity at the same time. This may not be important until the particle is observed, but what good is a particle that isn't allowed to interact with the universe?

posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 09:32 PM

Absolute zero is a theoretical temperature. Of course you can't achieve it. It only exists in theory.

posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 09:40 PM
Approaching absolute zero you get particle degeneracy, Bose Einstein Condensates and string entanglement as well as the potential to do a little ER bridging. What happens to the particles when they reach absolute zero, hmmmm? Well, since there has to be conservation on a number of levels, if mass disappears due to string entanglement and the collapse of wavefunction, then it has to be converted to energy or other ejected particles.

Make yourself a little adiabatic reactor (desktop deccelerator) that can make a dynamic magnetic bubble which operates at a speed greater than light, clamp a few low energy high accuracy controllable output lasers onto it, get a wide spectrum optical array for your computer, turn it on and watch the magic ;-)

Or you could buy mine, it was created in 1992/93 under NRC research contract and was completed and tested two years before Eric Cornell of JILA labs made his and got an article in Time.

Cheers - Dave

posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 12:23 AM
It would be very hard to actually tell if you reached it as at that temperature as i am guessing that all measuring devices would cease to work and also ruin the experiment by adding heat,
So even if they had they prob wouldn't know it and hell maybe they did freeze the whole universe in a no atomic energy or movement state that caused a chain reaction and time stopped only to be restarted when everything thawed out again and they received there latest number?
It is quite an interesting topic but at the moment we don't know if we have even reached it or could measure it
and every time we get to what we thought it was we need to re write the books and change it to even colder?

posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 02:41 AM
Funnily enough, water expands when it freezes. That's why ice floats. Also, I would think that matter vibrates at a higher frequency than sound as matter "waves" propagate at light speed as inferred my E=MC2.

I do see your point though. As another poster pointed out, absolute zero is a THEORETICAL figure, not attainable in the real world. You obviously have a good grasp of what it means to come to the conclusion you have.

posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 02:48 AM
If the molecules weren't moving at all, wouldn't that technically create a "brick wall" type affect? and if so, how can light from distant galaxies reach us if they pass through these zones where the temperature is so cold it freezes molecules? Or is light not affected by temperature?

Edit to add a few more questions lol: If molecules inside of a diamond are the hardest known surface and they still vibrate at a frequency, wouldn't molecules that aren't moving at all create a surface of unimaginable hardness.. How could anything pass through this type of space? A space ship would run into it and crash.

And also, could these temperatures affect the length of time it takes light to travel to us? And if so, would that make the distant galaxies even FURTHER from us than currently understood?
edit on 18-11-2010 by Ketzer22 because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 05:17 AM
Oh sorry, haha yes water does expand when it is cooled. I meant that the molecules become more organized when water becomes ice.

posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 01:39 PM

So, what I'm getting at here is that cooling something to the point of absolute zero would be impossible because Anything that exists has to have some vibration.

Yep.

You are right.

Absolute zero is a theoretical entity. Even the temperature of space is slightly above absolute zero; an average of about 270 degrees Kelvin. This is not for any of the reasons mentioned earlier in this thread, but because the whole universe is permeated by photons left over from the Big Bang; what we call the Cosmic Microwave Background.

Wikipedia

Fuller explanation

posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 06:02 PM

Originally posted by Astyanax
Even the temperature of space is slightly above absolute zero; an average of about 270 degrees Kelvin.
Did you mean -270 Celsius which is 3 Kelvin?

That's about as cold as it gets in the observable universe, roughly 3 degrees above absolute zero, I think.

posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 06:06 PM

Most of space is empty except for low levels of background energy. There is little matter out there to "crash" into, and it is not absolute zero out there because of this background energy.

posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 06:20 PM
There is an equation that shows what happens to a volume of ( ideal) gas at different temperatures:
pV = nRT

where p is the absolute pressure of the gas; V is the volume; n is the amount of substance; R is the universal gas constant; and T is the absolute temperature.

So if the temperature was 0 the volume would also be 0. So theoretically atoms would cease to exist at absolute zero. Since this is not possible ( matter- energy conservation laws) then absolute zero cannot be reached.

By this logic, should there also be an upper limit to the temperature scale, such as when molecular vibration reaches the speed of light? Since matter cannot move at this speed, it should be the highest temperature possible. I wonder what it is or if I am right?

edit on 18-11-2010 by Sundreez because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 07:28 PM

Wait, so what about using a vacuum? Since there would be no atoms/molecules in the vacuum, would you be able to cool it enough? Or do you need atoms and particles to be able to cool something down?
As for the highest temp you can heat something.. Im not sure, but would there be a point where the atoms would start to break down? If you could heat something to the point where the particles were moving close to the speed of light, the pressure would be immense and the particles could collide with each other

posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 07:30 PM

Physics as we know it, as far as I know it, say that a temperature can't exceed 1.41679 x 1032 Kelvins for the reasons you stated. These temperatures have been theorized to happen right after a big bang and at the end of a black hole's life. After all that entropy stuff reduces its mass and surface, the black hole's temperature increases (but it is not sustained for very long).
edit on 18-11-2010 by umop apisdn because: GRAMMAR

posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 10:10 PM

Did you mean -270 Celsius which is 3 Kelvin?

Yes, of course I do. Thank you for the correction.

posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 10:21 PM

By this logic, should there also be an upper limit to the temperature scale, such as when molecular vibration reaches the speed of light? Since matter cannot move at this speed, it should be the highest temperature possible. I wonder what it is or if I am right?

Again, this is a theoretical limit. At such a temperature subatomic particles--apart from photons--would become infinitely massive. The practical limit occurs much earlier.

posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 10:41 PM
To my simple uneducated mind, its like a professor I had always said...."nothing ever hits the ground' it falls 1/2 the distance and then 1/2 again etc..etc...never reaching the bottom...much like light speed travel, or temp stuff "I dabble in cryo steel treating'...there are no absolutes...as far as I know..in physics or mathmatics.
absolutes are not created IMO...they must, just exist, not be created ...if thats possible....but once again..I'm showing my lack of IQ.

back to SNL and Deep thoughts by Jack Handy....

posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 12:11 AM

Originally posted by Sundreez
There is an equation that shows what happens to a volume of ( ideal) gas at different temperatures:
pV = nRT

where p is the absolute pressure of the gas; V is the volume; n is the amount of substance; R is the universal gas constant; and T is the absolute temperature.

Since matter cannot move at this speed, it should be the highest temperature possible. I wonder what it is or if I am right?
You're sort of right and sort of wrong.

You stated the ideal gas law correctly so that much is right if you are looking at gases within the limitations of the equation, however you are wrong to try to apply the equation to situations outside its limitations of accuracy:

www.nas.nasa.gov...

Within its limitations the Ideal Gas Law can accurately predict the behavior of real gases...
But at far more extreme pressures differences between actual and predicted values start to appear:..

This is because at more extreme pressures factors which the Ideal Gas Law chooses to ignore become important enough to undermine the models accuracy but for the usual lab conditions the Ideal Gas Law closely predicts the physical behavior of a gas.

In summary an ideal gas is a model, a fictional creation which has no molecular volume and no molecular interactions. Like many simple models, it makes accurate predictions where certain factors can be ignored; more complex models are needed when these factors can no longer be ignored.

There may be an upper limit to the speed at which molecules can move, but there's no upper limit to their momentum, so I think that's probably why the speed of light doesn't limit temperature. Therefore the limit isn't the speed of light but the Planck temperature:

www.straightdope.com...

The faster molecules move, the hotter they get. At 10^10 K electrons approach the speed of light, but they also become more massive, so their temperature can continue to rise. At 10^32 K such staggering densities obtain that greater temperature would cause each particle of matter to become its own black hole, and the usual understanding of space and time would collapse. Ergo, the Planck temperature is as hot as things can get. Or at least it's the highest temp conceivable in present theory. There's a chance when a quantum theory of gravity is worked out we may find even higher temperatures are possible.

posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 12:12 AM
this thread is gonna give me some crazy dreams tonight.

new topics

3