Is there a Limit to How Cold Matter Can Get?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of absolute zero (0 Kelvin) and its implications for matter, energy states, and the behavior of particles at extremely low temperatures. Participants explore theoretical and conceptual aspects, questioning the feasibility of reaching absolute zero and the nature of energy at that state.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question how matter can exist at absolute zero, suggesting that it implies no movement and no energy, which seems implausible given the presence of fundamental forces.
  • Others clarify that absolute zero indicates the lowest thermal energy state, but does not imply the absence of all forms of energy or motion.
  • There is a discussion about whether there is still a minimum energy at 0 Kelvin, with some suggesting that intrinsic energy states, such as those of bound electrons, must still exist.
  • One participant argues that absolute zero is more of a theoretical limit rather than a physically achievable state, noting that all systems retain some thermal motion.
  • Concerns are raised about the validity of claims regarding absolute zero, with some participants expressing skepticism about the proofs and hypotheses associated with it, particularly in quantum mechanics.
  • Another participant mentions that significant advancements in cooling techniques have allowed scientists to achieve temperatures very close to absolute zero, challenging the notion that motion or gravity prevents reaching this state.
  • There is a debate about the relevance of achieving absolute zero and what happens to materials at that temperature, with some participants emphasizing the theoretical implications rather than practical realizations.
  • One participant reflects on the nature of scientific concepts, suggesting that all measurements and concepts are inherently approximate, which may complicate discussions about absolute zero.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the implications of absolute zero, with no consensus reached on whether it can be physically realized or what it fully entails for matter. Disagreements persist regarding the interpretations of energy states and the validity of claims made about absolute zero.

Contextual Notes

Limitations in the discussion include unresolved assumptions about energy states at absolute zero, the dependence on definitions of energy and motion, and the challenges in proving theoretical claims related to quantum mechanics.

JPC
Messages
204
Reaction score
1
just wondering

how can matter be at a state for absolute 0 (0 kelvin), because it would mean that electrons arent moving , and that they've got no energy.

Nothing moving doesn't seem very possible because there's the 4 fundamental forces ( example : how can the gravitational force of an object suddenly fade away)

So is there a limit of extreme cold temperature for our maily atom-based environment ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Something at absolute 0 means it is in the lowest possible energy state, not that there is nothing moving.
 
oh ok

but 0 kelvin means 0 energy right
or is there still the minimum energy at 0 kelvin (the energy that we today cannot take away ; example : gravity)
 
JPC said:
oh ok

but 0 kelvin means 0 energy right
or is there still the minimum energy at 0 kelvin (the energy that we today cannot take away ; example : gravity)
doesn't no energy mean no mass? no mass no gravity...
 
No.

Zero kelvin means no thermal motion. It doesn't say anything else about other types of energy - that intrinsic to the matter in question. Taking the example of a bound electron, it *must* have a minimum kinetic energy for the bound state to exist. The electron will still occupy a non-zero kinetic energy state in its atom, it's just that the atom won't be moving.
 
absolute zero is more like an interesting limiting case then a physically realizable state. Any system will always have some thermal motion however small.
 
Allday said:
absolute zero is more like an interesting limiting case then a physically realizable state. Any system will always have some thermal motion however small.

Doesn't stop people from stating what will happen at absolute zero despite their being no proof, and believing it to be true, as I've found many times, OK so a hypothesis sates that at absolute zero x will happen, now prove it?... OK so it's just a hypothesis?

No that's what will happen according to QM?

So it's just a hypothesis?

No that's what will happen?

So what's your proof?

QM theory?

Oh my mistake in that case it must be true:rolleyes: nm.
 
Sojourner01 said:
Zero kelvin means no thermal motion. It doesn't say anything else about other types of energy
maybe gay-lussac isn't still valid, but when a gas reaches 0 kelvin (and it cant) then its volume should shrink to zero
 
Schrödinger's Dog said:
Doesn't stop people from stating what will happen at absolute zero despite their being no proof, and believing it to be true, as I've found many times, OK so a hypothesis sates that at absolute zero x will happen, now prove it?... OK so it's just a hypothesis?

No that's what will happen according to QM?

So it's just a hypothesis?

No that's what will happen?

So what's your proof?

QM theory?

Oh my mistake in that case it must be true:rolleyes: nm.

I'm not sure what you're rambling about, but you can do a lot of solid physics at "zero" temperature and use it as the limiting case as your temperature becomes much smaller than the temperature scale you may be interested in.

For example, say I'm interested in the behavior of a superconductor much below its critical temperature. Wouldn't it be okay to try out the zero-temperature limit?
 
  • #10
StatMechGuy said:
I'm not sure what you're rambling about, but you can do a lot of solid physics at "zero" temperature and use it as the limiting case as your temperature becomes much smaller than the temperature scale you may be interested in.

For example, say I'm interested in the behavior of a superconductor much below its critical temperature. Wouldn't it be okay to try out the zero-temperature limit?

I was referring to absolute zero actually, have you achieved it? If you have what happens when a material reaches absolute zero? If not can you tell me what may happen or what does happen?
 
  • #11
Schrödinger's Dog said:
I was referring to absolute zero actually, have you achieved it?


This is not really relevant to the original poster's question. The velocity of a material is clearly NOT the thing that prevents a material from attaining absolute zero. Consider these two facts:

1. The Earth is obviously moving through space at a considerable speed, although no one actually knows our true velocity.

2. Scientists have been able to achieve termperatures very very close to absolute zero. From Scientific American, Wolfgang Ketterle of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who won the Nobel Prize in Physics for his work with ultracold atoms, explains:

"In the 1980s and 1990s new methods for cooling atomic gases were developed: laser cooling and evaporative cooling. By combining these methods, temperatures below one nanokelvin (one billionth of a degree Kelvin) have been achieved. The lowest temperature recorded so far, described in a publication from our group in the September 12, 2003 issue of Science, is 450 picokelvins, which beat the previous record holder by a factor of six. Two recent Nobel prizes (in 1997 and 2001) were awarded for these developments."

Absolute zero represents the lowest possible energy state of matter. Achieving a trillionth of our everyday termperature clearly indicates that motion (through space) and gravity have nothing to do with achieving this feat.
 
  • #12
Schrödinger's Dog said:
I was referring to absolute zero actually, have you achieved it? If you have what happens when a material reaches absolute zero? If not can you tell me what may happen or what does happen?

Well, I've never sat on an inertial reference frame either. Have you? An exactly inertial reference frame? Why would we ever invent a concept if it only has good approximate value?
 
  • #13
StatMechGuy said:
Why would we ever invent a concept if it only has good approximate value?
All concepts have some amount of "approximate value". No concept has a higher degree than that, although some get extremely close.

The subject of this thread will get under some people's skin, because it's common for one thing or another, to be assumed to be greater than approximate and subsequently considered a "given".

The only given, is that all finite measurements are approximate and it can't be absolutely determined, how they arise from an infinite field.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K