Statistical mechanics and probability

AI Thread Summary
Probability is rarely zero, as illustrated by the example of a giant meteor hitting Earth. In statistical mechanics, the random motion of particles affects measurements like those from a thermometer. Theoretically, there could be a moment when all molecules are oriented away from the probe, resulting in a reading of zero energy, though this scenario is extremely unlikely. The time required for this to occur would be astronomically long, potentially exceeding the lifespan of the universe. This highlights the complexities and nuances of probability within statistical mechanics.
flemmyd
Messages
141
Reaction score
1
One of the things I've learned about probability is that it seldom = 0. For example, the probability of a giant meteor hitting Earth is incredibly low, but it isn't zero. Thats why it happened (eventually).

So let's extend this to statistical mechanics. My understanding of (say) a thermometer is the random motion of individual particles hit the probe and transfer energy to it. Statistically speaking, shouldn't there be a time when EVERY molecule points away from the probe and nothing is hitting it --> it reads zero energy? This obviously wouldn't be common, but at SOME point, it should happen.

correct, incorrect?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
flemmyd said:
One of the things I've learned about probability is that it seldom = 0. For example, the probability of a giant meteor hitting Earth is incredibly low, but it isn't zero. Thats why it happened (eventually).

So let's extend this to statistical mechanics. My understanding of (say) a thermometer is the random motion of individual particles hit the probe and transfer energy to it. Statistically speaking, shouldn't there be a time when EVERY molecule points away from the probe and nothing is hitting it --> it reads zero energy? This obviously wouldn't be common, but at SOME point, it should happen.

correct, incorrect?

Yes. "SOME point" being much much longer than the heat death of the universe.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...

Similar threads

Back
Top