1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

What happens to matter that isn't vibrating?

  1. May 17, 2010 #1
    if matter is energy at a slow vibration, what happens with no vibration?
    would matter not vibrating be super dense?
    can vibration replace dark matter in equations?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. May 17, 2010 #2
    No vibration = no matter.
     
  4. May 17, 2010 #3
    "The laws of thermodynamics state that absolute zero cannot be reached because this would require a thermodynamic system to be fully removed from the rest of the universe. A system at absolute zero would still possess quantum mechanical zero-point energy. While molecular motion would not cease entirely at absolute zero, the system would not have enough energy for transference to other systems. It is therefore correct to say that molecular kinetic energy is minimal at absolute zero."

    My question asks, could such a mass be created with the extreme condensation of matter in gravity as powerful as something like a collapsing star, past the point of heating it self due to molecular fiction. Would such a mass be super dense resulting in super gravity?
     
  5. May 17, 2010 #4

    diazona

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    Sounds like you're talking about a black hole (although I could be misinterpreting your question),

    Incidentally, even black holes have a temperature, which is higher than absolute zero (although not by much).
     
  6. May 17, 2010 #5
    No, I think you are the only one that has correctly interpreted my question.
    I am wondering if the mass that makes black holes would be super dense matter condensed past the point of fusion at low temp. due to shear size?
     
  7. May 18, 2010 #6

    diazona

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    According to general relativity, all the matter in a black hole is concentrated in a singularity at the center. The singularity occupies zero volume and thus has infinite density.

    I still don't know what you're getting at with respect to vibrations... that's a completely separate topic from black holes.
     
  8. May 18, 2010 #7
    Yes, I know.
    I am asking about the actual singularity.
    Is what makes this awesome gravity called a black hole a form of mass with particles so tightly condensed they almost stop vibrating from super gravity it forms super gravity?
    Super dense matter with minimal kinetic energy, formed when gravity overcomes fusion?
     
  9. May 18, 2010 #8

    diazona

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    Still not sure I'm understanding your question, but it may not have an answer. When that much mass gets compressed into a singularity, the whole notion of "particle" or even what form the mass may have becomes meaningless, to the best of our knowledge. There is no physical theory that can describe the singularity itself. The theories only tell us what happens outside the singularity.
     
  10. May 18, 2010 #9

    sophiecentaur

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2017 Award

    I think you are trying to apply ideas of thermal vibration to situations where the notion of atoms, bound together in a solid just doesn't apply. Under extremes of pressure (and temperature) inside a collapsing massive star there would be a fluid plasma and there would be no 'vibrations' as such - just atomic nuclei and other particles rushing around an colliding with each other.
    If there is 'no room' for movement, because the matter is so dense (as in a neutron star or beyond), then the temperature, as defined for normal conditions (i.e. average KE of particles), could, arguably, be zero but the total density of Energy would still be enormous.
    I think you just need to redefine things under those conditions and not expect normal terms to apply.
     
  11. May 18, 2010 #10
    Right, the normal ideas of states of matter are transformed, molecular bonds mean nothing, usually it is a star, gravity versus fusion explosions of energy.
    When fusion wins, super nova throw heavy elements into the universe,
    When gravity wins, neutron star.
    What if, when there is enough mass, gravity compresses the mass past neutron star density to form a black hole?
     
  12. May 19, 2010 #11

    sophiecentaur

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2017 Award

    Not quite correct. A neutron star is what remains after a supernova, under the appropriate conditions.
     
  13. May 19, 2010 #12
    point taken...
     
  14. May 19, 2010 #13

    diazona

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    Or it could be a black hole (that remains after the supernova). It depends on how massive the original star is.
     
  15. May 20, 2010 #14
    Taking a guess at a formula to describe this theory...probably need help to refine it....

    energy = matter, condensed squared right?
    e=mc2

    so

    e=mc2=DxV

    where D is atomic density and V is Vibration, and mc2 describes the atomic level; while DxV describes particles at the sub atomic level.
     
  16. May 20, 2010 #15

    Doc Al

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    What theory?

    E = mc2 gives the rest energy of some mass; c is the speed of light.

    Huh?

    (Note that personal theories are not permitted on PF, if that's what this is an attempt at.)
     
  17. May 20, 2010 #16
    relatively speaking, the faster an object moves is used to describe the relative kinetic energy increase proportional to speed.
    Can not the relative atomic density times the speed of the vibration of particles also determine potential kinetic energy?
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2010
  18. May 20, 2010 #17
    (Note that personal theories are not permitted on PF, if that's what this is an attempt at.)

    I ask because i want to know, is all.
     
  19. May 21, 2010 #18

    sophiecentaur

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2017 Award

    Your picture of what's going on is far too much like a classical one (on which thermodynamics is based). You seem to be talking in terms of billiard balls / separate entities vibrating. Why should you assume it's like that under these extreme conditions? What does 'vibration' mean in that case? By your argument, you should also be considering atomic 'vibrations' within molecules under normal conditions, if you use the term 'temperature'. The fact is that the energy levels are all so different in highly condensed matter that you have to think again before applying simple concepts.
     
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook