Register to reply

Highest Possible Temperature

by FeDeX_LaTeX
Tags: temperature
Share this thread:
Lok
#19
Mar17-10, 03:32 AM
P: 462
Quote Quote by BL4CKCR4Y0NS View Post
With a lot of energy.

Nah actually ... I don't think we've ever artificially heated any substance to such high levels...
The hottest things we heated were the particle collisions from various experiments. Don't know the energy involved, but that is the only indication of temp.
BL4CKCR4Y0NS
#20
Mar17-10, 03:39 AM
P: 61
But it did they actually reach Planck?
Lok
#21
Mar17-10, 04:15 AM
P: 462
Quote Quote by BL4CKCR4Y0NS View Post
But it did they actually reach Planck?
Clearly not, but why bother. It's just a number.
BL4CKCR4Y0NS
#22
Mar17-10, 04:26 AM
P: 61
It's not JUST a number... and plus, it would be a nice achievement. :D
Lok
#23
Mar17-10, 05:24 AM
P: 462
Quote Quote by BL4CKCR4Y0NS View Post
It's not JUST a number... and plus, it would be a nice achievement. :D
It's just a mathematical gizmo number thingy that is not necessarily of any significance ... and it is an achievement only if you get something out of it, otherwise it is just a number.
BL4CKCR4Y0NS
#24
Mar17-10, 05:29 AM
P: 61
Okay fair enough ... =]

But you can't say that it wouldn't be an achievement if we reached absolute zero ...
Lok
#25
Mar17-10, 05:36 AM
P: 462
Although highly unlikely that we will ever reach it, that would really be an achievement. Still from what I know zero energy is highly forbidden.

The close to 0 BE condensates are truly important and clearly an achievement in making.
uraveragechum
#26
Mar17-10, 06:13 AM
P: 4
No, the scale from cold to hot in Kelvin should be...
0 K,...500 K,... Inf. K,... - Inf. K,... - 500 K,... - 0 K

Here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_temperature

But I was just asking for clarification...
SpectraCat
#27
Mar17-10, 06:46 AM
Sci Advisor
P: 1,395
Quote Quote by uraveragechum View Post
No, the scale from cold to hot in Kelvin should be...
0 K,...500 K,... Inf. K,... - Inf. K,... - 500 K,... - 0 K

Here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_temperature

But I was just asking for clarification...
No .. this is just an effective definition, much like negative mass, that can be useful in certain well-defined and restricted cases like the ones given in the examples on the Wiki page, but it not correct in any absolute sense. For that to be true in the absolute sense, there would have to be an upper bound on the number of energy states of the universe, and no such limit is known to exist AFAIK.

Furthermore, the fact that it is not useful or correct in the absolute case can be understood by looking at the temperature scale you posted ... it goes through infinity (!!!) and comes out the other side, which is clearly nonsense for a direct physical observable such as temperature. How could you measure negative temperatures with a thermometer? It would violate the zeroth law of thermodynamics, since an object with negative T could never be in thermal equilibrium with an object with positive T.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Highest art General Discussion 36
Highest CPU Temperature Computing & Technology 9
Highest possible temperature = Planck temperature? Classical Physics 3
Highest Sustained Temperature Mankind Can Produce? Introductory Physics Homework 4
Highest Temperature High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics 0