Temperature in Space: Is There Really None?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Stalker23
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Temperature
AI Thread Summary
Temperature in space is a complex topic, as it generally refers to the kinetic energy of particles. While space is mostly a vacuum with extremely low particle density, it can still have a temperature, typically around 2.7 K due to cosmic microwave background radiation. The presence of a few atoms per cubic centimeter contributes to this temperature, but the vast emptiness means that traditional notions of heat are less applicable. Radiation in space carries energy, which can also be considered when discussing temperature. Ultimately, while space is not "hot" in the conventional sense, it does have a measurable temperature due to the energy present in radiation and sparse particles.
Stalker23
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
is there temperature in space?

if there are no particles, how can there be temperature?

and how can there be no temperature...temperature is the differnce in energy between objects? right...


thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well temperature of matter reflects the kinetic energy (vibration or translational motion) of atoms. More generally it is related to the energy density of a material.

In space IIRC, the temperature is generally given about =<10 K, and perhaps that is more the case way out by the gas planets or toward Uranus and beyond.

There are atoms out there in space, by the density is extremely low, about one to a few atoms/cc.

http://cassfos02.ucsd.edu/public/tutorial/ISM.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
does the space around those atoms have heat? or is it just...empty space, where radiation goes through
 
The radiation itself has energy, and thus heat. The coldest you'll get out in the far reaches of space (read: far from any heat source such as a sun) is about 2.7K, the temperature of the cosmic microwave background radiation.
 
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top