I Can you have a high temperature with very little heat?

Click For Summary
Temperature is defined as the average kinetic energy of molecules, while heat refers to the total kinetic energy. The discussion explores a hypothetical scenario where a single molecule remains in a radiation-shielded box, suggesting that it could exhibit high temperature despite having low total kinetic energy. It is noted that temperature definitions primarily apply to systems with a reasonable number of molecules, raising questions about real-life sensations of heat or cold in such conditions. The conversation also touches on quantum physics, indicating that temperature may not equate to average kinetic energy in all scenarios, particularly with an ideal Fermi gas. Ultimately, the inquiry remains about whether one would feel hot or cold in environments with very low molecular density, even if they are at high temperatures.
MaxKang
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
From what I know, temperature is defined to be the average kinetic energy of molecules within a system while heat is said to be the total kinetic energy of molecules.

I know this might be something we can never achieve in real life but here's how my thought process went.

Imagine you have a box with radiation shielding such that there is no radiation process involved. If you can somehow suck out all the molecules leaving just one molecule behind, depending on how slow or fast this molecule travels you can have very little "total kinetic energy" with quite high temperature(average kinetic energy). I guess when the molecule bounces off the wall there could be a sudden change in temperature.

I am aware that temperature is only defined when you have a reasonable amount of molecules but if we can somehow come up with the setting I mentioned, then what happens in real life? do we feel hot? cold?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • Like
Likes MaxKang
MaxKang said:
From what I know, temperature is defined to be the average kinetic energy of molecules within a system while heat is said to be the total kinetic energy of molecules.

Temperature only equals average kinetic energy (with some caveats) in classical physics. This is not so in quantum physics. Example - ideal Fermi gas.
 
  • Like
Likes MaxKang
akhmeteli said:
Temperature only equals average kinetic energy (with some caveats) in classical physics. This is not so in quantum physics. Example - ideal Fermi gas.
But we still should be able to sense how "cold" or "hot" it feels to be in that environment should we not? Does the quantum theory predict that we will indeed feel cold in an environment where there is only a very little amount of molecules?
 
We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following; https://www.cambridge.org/engage/api-gateway/coe/assets/orp/resource/item/66a6a6005101a2ffa86cdd48/original/a-derivation-of-maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf 'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s...
I read Hanbury Brown and Twiss's experiment is using one beam but split into two to test their correlation. It said the traditional correlation test were using two beams........ This confused me, sorry. All the correlation tests I learnt such as Stern-Gerlash are using one beam? (Sorry if I am wrong) I was also told traditional interferometers are concerning about amplitude but Hanbury Brown and Twiss were concerning about intensity? Isn't the square of amplitude is the intensity? Please...
First, I need to check that I have the 3 notations correct for an inner product in finite vector spaces over a complex field; v* means: given the isomorphism V to V* then: (a) physicists and others: (u,v)=v*u ; linear in the second argument (b) some mathematicians: (u,v)=u*v; linear in the first argument. (c) bra-ket: <v|u>= (u,v) from (a), so v*u . <v|u> is linear in the second argument. If these are correct, then it would seem that <v|u> being linear in the second...