Absolute Infinity

This is a discussion on Absolute Infinity within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; I asked the following question to my science teacher: If the lowest temperature, theoretically, is when the motion of electrons ...

  1. #1
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    4,913

    Absolute Infinity

    I asked the following question to my science teacher:

    If the lowest temperature, theoretically, is when the motion of electrons around the nucleus ceases, then what happens when they are orbiting at the speed of light, meaning, according to traditional physics, the fastest they could get, and thus the hottest temperature. Does the atom split or something?

    He told me that the temperature of an atom or molecule is not determined by electronic motion. I still disagree - because the motion of the atom or molecule as a whole does not make sense in causing the temperature of a substance. So can anyone answer the question of what exactly causes temperature. I'd also like to find an answer to the question I asked my science teacher.

  2. #2
    Funniest man in this seat minesweeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    801
    >>because the motion of the atom or molecule as a whole does not make sense in causing the temperature of a substance<<

    Why not?

  3. #3
    Registered User Aran's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,301
    i think temperature is merely the friction between your skin particles and the particles in another substance you are touching, be it the air, or ground, or whatever...

    correct me if i'm wrong.

  4. #4
    UNBANNED OneStiffRod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    669
    can an atom HEAT UP? or does it give off heat energy?
    My Avatar says: "Stay in School"

    Rocco is the Boy!
    "SHUT YOUR LIPS..."

  5. #5
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    4,913
    OneStiffRod - Well you can absorb or give off heat energy, but I'm not ure which one "Heating up" implies - I would assume giving off heat energy since it would be hot to the touch.

    Aran - Technically speaking yes. If you turn on the stove, the electrons (or particles - we're yet to resolve that issue) speed up (if this happens enough, the particles space out and become a liquid or gas, depending on the current density). When the cooler electrons/particles on your finger curiously poke that, electrons/particles collide, causing changes in temperature. The particles on the stove stop going in that direction as much, and become cooler, and the opposite happens to your finger.

    Minesweeper - we'll let's talk relativity. The speed of the particle has to be in relation to something. What is it in relation to? It's aorund millions of things each day, but most objects keep roughly the same temperature for the majority of the time. There's some other paradoxes: if it is possible for an object in space to travel as close as possible to the speed of light as long as it doesn't attain that speed, then it is possible to have 2 particles travelling at 99% of the speed of light, going in opposite directions. When the 2 particles pass eachother, in relation to eachother, each is travelling at 198% of the speed of light - theoretically impossible.

    I'm really not talking temperature here. The basic question is, what happens if an electron is orbiting it's nucleus at (or near) the speed of light?

  6. #6
    PC Fixer-Upper Waldo2k2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    2,001
    >>The basic question is, what happens if an electron is orbiting it's nucleus at (or near) the speed of light?

    the bonds between the electrons and the rest of the atom will break. I assume it will happen at a speed much lower than that, gravity is a function of weight, the nucleus has gravity over the electrons. Speed can increase (effect) weight, soooo, theoretically the electrons will become too heavy for the nucleus to retain it's gravitational pull over them....but that leads me to wonder if that will reverse the process and make the protons and neutrons stick close to the electrons....either way it's no longer an atom in the sense that we know it.
    PHP and XML
    Let's talk about SAX

  7. #7
    booyakasha
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    208
    Originally posted by Waldo2k2
    >>, the nucleus has gravity over the electrons. Speed can increase (effect) weight, soooo, theoretically the electrons will become too heavy for the nucleus to retain it's gravitational pull over them....
    The electrons are not held in place (only) by gravity, they are held by other forces. If it was just gravity that held them then they would just leave the little tiny weak pull of gravity towards the nucleus(very small mass) and head towards the big powerful pull of gravity of the earth(very big mass).

    And in regards to the original question, temperature is the kinetic energy stored in the vibrations of molecules and doesn't have anything to do with the speed of electrons.

  8. #8
    In The Light
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    598
    howdy,
    the speed of the orbiting electron doesn't change, heat is a factor of how fast the entire molecule is moving.
    changing the speed of the elctron is what fision is made of... or is it fusion??

    M.R.
    I don't like you very much. Please post a lot less.
    Cheez
    *and then*
    No, I know you were joking. My point still stands.

  9. #9
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    161
    Temperature at the molecular/atomic scale is a measure of speed of motion. This sounds a bit vague but it actually makes sense. If a fast moving object hits a slow moving object, odds are the fast object will slow and the slow object speed up. Relative speed of motion is what determines which direction heat is transfered, the basic definition of temperature. Of its own accord, heat energy will transfer from hot to cold. Heat energy is the kinetic energy stored in molecules/atoms.

    There is a fundamental theorem in kinetic heat theory called equipartion. Simply stated, it says that energy is evenly divided between the "modes" of a molecule/atom. Posible modes include translation, rotation, vibration, etc. For technical reasons to involved to go into here, electron motion while still bound to the molecule/atom is not significant for temperature measurement. (Has to do with the low weight of an electron compared with a molecule/atom. Also, if you speed up an electron it will jump to a higher orbital, slowing in the process. At ordinary temps, electron motion is not closely tied to temperature.)

    By the way, motion of all types doesn't stop at absolute zero. It's just the minimum possible motion. (Referred to as the ground state.)

    As Waldo2k2 stated, at the high temperatures your talking about, molecular bonds break and atoms ionize. It's known as a plasma. At these very high temperatures, electron motion is related to temp. (The difference is that the electrons are now independent particles, and constitute equally important constituant particles of the gas.)

    There is one interesting exception at ordinary temps. In electrically conducting metals, the conduction electrons are significant. This is why the best electrical conductors (aluminum, copper, silver) are also the best heat conductors.

  10. #10
    It's full of stars adrianxw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    4,831
    >>> changing the speed of the elctron is what fision is made of... or is it fusion??

    Both fission and fusion are nuclear reactions, electrons do not play a part.

    In fission, a nucleus becomes destabilised in some way and splits into two, or more components releasing energy in the process. With Uranium for example, the already unstable isotope U-235 absorbs a stray neutron which is enough to trigger the fission reaction. Fission is what drives your typical Uranium or Plutonium bombs, and nuclear power plants.

    Fusion is the joinging together of two nuclei to form a larger one. The is not easy as the two nuclei have the same elctrical charge and hence repel each other. At higher energies, this repulsion can be overcome and the short range, but very poweful strong nuclear force can coallesce the two component nuclei also releasing energy in the process. Fusion is what drives the stas and your average Hydrogen bomb.
    Wave upon wave of demented avengers march cheerfully out of obscurity unto the dream.

  11. #11
    The Earth is not flat. Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,420
    "If the lowest temperature, theoretically, is when the motion of electrons around the nucleus ceases"

    That never happens, not only does that not happen, but molecules don't even stop vibrating at the lowest temperature!

    Weird eh?

    "then what happens when they are orbiting at the speed of light, meaning, according to traditional physics, the fastest they could get, and thus the hottest temperature."

    There is no real connection between the "speed" the electrons are travelling at and the temperature.

    When dealing with metals or indeed heat loss/gain via radiation then electrons are certainly involved but again "speed" is not whats important, rather the energy level of the occupied orbital.

    You can have two orbitals with the same orbital angular momentum (electron "speed"), and one can have a higher energy than the other.

    "He told me that the temperature of an atom or molecule is not determined by electronic motion"

    He's right..... except there is no such thing as "temperature of an atom", temperature is a macroscopic property it can only be applied to macroscopic objects not individual atoms.

    " I still disagree - because the motion of the atom or molecule as a whole does not make sense in causing the temperature of a substance. So can anyone answer the question of what exactly causes temperature. I'd also like to find an answer to the question I asked my science teacher."

    If you place a hot object in contact with a cold object the molecules in the hot object are jiggling around faster (ie. have more kinetic energy) than those in the cold object, at the surface between the two objects there are collisions between the fast moving molecules of the hot object and the slow moving molecules of the cold object. As a result the cold object's molecules end up moving a bit faster (they gain K.E) and the hot object's molecules end up moving abit slower (they lose K.E). Ie. the hot object cools down a little and the cold object warms up a little. This process will continue untill on average both objects molecules have the same K.E. ie untill they are both at the same temperature.
    Last edited by Clyde; 01-16-2003 at 08:16 AM.

  12. #12
    Unregd
    Guest
    If I remember correctly, an experiment was performed trying to cool some hydrogen (?) atoms to, or near, absolute zero. When the temperature of the atoms was very near to 0 K, the nuclei of the atoms condensed. At high enough temperatures, atomic nuclei break apart into their constitutuent nucleoids (protons and neutrons) and, from that, into quarks.

    If this isn't completely accurate, maybe someone who has studied modern physics more can fill in the details.

  13. #13
    Registered User alex6852's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    43
    By Einstein's relativety theory when the object's speed comes to speed of light(300,000 km/sec) it's mass becomes infinite. So basickly you cant go with speed of light because you'll need an infinite amount of energy to move something with infinite mass.
    C++ rulez!!!

  14. #14
    It's full of stars adrianxw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    4,831
    >>> into quarks.

    Into a quark/gluon plasma.
    Wave upon wave of demented avengers march cheerfully out of obscurity unto the dream.

  15. #15
    booyakasha
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    208
    Originally posted by alex6852
    By Einstein's relativety theory when the object's speed comes to speed of light(300,000 km/sec) it's mass becomes infinite. So basickly you cant go with speed of light because you'll need an infinite amount of energy to move something with infinite mass.
    I'm not sure that what you are saying has anything to do with the topic of conversation, but anyway...

    what you are saying may or may not ( depending on your beliefs ) apply to electrons, because, for one example, in some cases two electrons can cancel each other out. So hence if two equal size and type pieces of matter can cancel each other out and become nothing. Then according to the laws of conservation of matter, they aren't really matter and therefore don't actually have mass.

    And I know someone will say, "well but electrons do have mass", which is true, but it is also true that light has mass, and it can't be argued that light isn't moving at the speed of light.

    So basically Einstein probably wasn't totally correct, just closer to correct then anyone else at the time. Anyway, physics is a work in progress, so you can't assume anything considered true today, will be considered true in the future.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Integer infinity?
    By housguest in forum C Programming
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-21-2008, 01:03 AM
  2. Absolute value of each element in a given array
    By DriftinSW20 in forum C Programming
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 11-15-2007, 03:08 PM
  3. Absolute Value Function
    By Govalant in forum C Programming
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-30-2007, 06:39 AM
  4. how to set value equal to infinity
    By Downnin in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-28-2005, 04:14 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21