If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   In their latest round of yanking our legs, scientists announce temperatures below absolute zero   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 68
    More: Cool, absolute zero, temperatures, potential energy, billionths, vacuum chambers, kinetic energy, physics experiment, energy levels  
•       •       •

4380 clicks; posted to Geek » on 04 Jan 2013 at 11:58 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



68 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-04 03:49:26 PM  
Well, once they get that Quantum Logic thinker dialed in and realize that they aren't hitting zero because of chronic distortions from the future, not to mention their ice pit being bombed by the Logologists I bet they will be able to hit zero finally.
 
2013-01-04 04:13:03 PM  

Vodka Zombie: You can never get to zero so long as you have an infinite number of decimal places on your scale.

This is why math must be stopped. Well, that and because Jesus.


shut up zeno!
 
2013-01-04 04:16:33 PM  
So they've basically discovered the word length of the computer simulation that we live in.
 
2013-01-04 04:27:51 PM  
Ok, physics has officially jumped the shark. I'm going to watch chemistry instead.
 
2013-01-04 05:00:16 PM  

treesloth: Ok, physics has officially jumped the shark. I'm going to watch chemistry instead.


Geology is better to watch these days. Those OG rock-lickers can throw down the serious beats.
 
2013-01-04 05:03:02 PM  
That's odd. I don't claim any knowledge of higher math or physics, but I was under the impression that you couldn't actually get to absolute zero, much less beyond it, because that would interfere with Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, in that any particle that stopped moving would have a definite position. Am I wrong on that, quantum geeks?
 
2013-01-04 05:10:44 PM  
So what I'm picturing is something analogous to taking a metal spring, compressing it (storing energy in it), then cooling to a nanokelvin.

Release the spring, and if it expands (assuming it does not shatter), its molecules acquire kinetic energy from the spring expanding,

So it went 'cold' to hot' without new energy input.

Switch springs for electron energy states.

meh. .
 
2013-01-04 05:14:22 PM  
What happened to you, Absolute Zero? You used to be the coolest.
 
2013-01-04 05:14:35 PM  

buckler: , but I was under the impression that you couldn't actually get to absolute zero, much less beyond it,


You can't get to it, but you can get around it. You can never take all the energy out of something and thus stop it moving entirely, after a point taking energy out leads to energy being added. However, if you set things up the right way, you just end up on the other side of it.

PsyLord: they don't believe in the laws of thermodynamics.


They do, just that those laws may need some amending.
 
2013-01-04 06:29:45 PM  

WhyteRaven74: You can't get to it, but you can get around it. You can never take all the energy out of something and thus stop it moving entirely, after a point taking energy out leads to energy being added. However, if you set things up the right way, you just end up on the other side of it.


Funny how that seems to be how lightspeed works, too. You don't have to go the speed of light to go faster than the speed of light, so that smug prick Einstein continues being correct.
 
2013-01-04 06:30:01 PM  
I guess it's been covered, but what a dumb article.

The sense in which these particles as "negative" is not the opposite of positive. It's not like debt vs wealth, or like below vs above sea level. It's more like a photograph vs its... ahem, negative.

The temperature of the particles is still a few nanokelvin above absolute zero (they still have mean molecular motion greater than zero), but are manipulated to have some properties that high temperature objects exhibit. Hence, it is 'negative' -- inverting said properties. In the debt/wealth, above/below sense, it still has a 'positive' temperature.
 
2013-01-04 06:34:35 PM  

ZoeNekros: The temperature of the particles is still a few nanokelvin above absolute zero (they still have mean molecular motion greater than zero), but are manipulated to have some properties that high temperature objects exhibit. Hence, it is 'negative' -- inverting said properties. In the debt/wealth, above/below sense, it still has a 'positive' temperature.


So it's like bundling a bunch of shaky mortgages and putting a AAA credit rating on the whole thing?
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-01-04 07:37:06 PM  
Because despite their higher energy state, they pull energy from "colder" positive temperatures, so far as I could glean.

This thread reminds me of the old SF novel The Universe Between by Alan Nourse. There's a scene with reverse heat flow.
 
2013-01-04 08:19:01 PM  
I used to wonder where all the old fashioned "burn 'em at the stake" religious fanatics went...then one day I realized that they all became physicists.
 
2013-01-04 11:46:39 PM  
Pretty much they defined something else temperature and are saying that in our temperature we can go below absolute zero in the other. Might be nice found, but making that kind of claims is just trying to get attention/funding.
Tough with out sensationalism nobody wold care. Everybody knows about absolute zero so they know they'll get buzz.
 
2013-01-04 11:56:24 PM  

QuantuMechanic: doglover: Slaxl: I don't understand any of that but it seems to me that if 'absolute zero' is the term for the lowest possible temperature and someone gets below that, then shouldn't 'absolute zero' be redefined with the new value?

No, because the new value seems to be some kind of new state beyond no atomic motion (which is absolute zero) so the negative designation makes sense.

It's like backwards entropy, fizzy lifting drink for the density of occupied states.

[xroads.virginia.edu image 640x480]



You sir, win negative six internets.

//negative internets are faster than positive ones.
 
2013-01-05 04:33:44 AM  
I always knew temperature as a rate of change proportion between entropy and energy, dU/dS as it were. Usually energy increases as entropy increases. A negative temperature would be a negative slope such as decreasing entropy as energy was increased.

You'd have an energy of minimum entropy as a local minima.
 
2013-01-07 02:34:37 PM  
I am disappointed no one suggested subbie's Mom's vajay jay or an ex-wife/girlfriends cooter...
 
Displayed 18 of 68 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


Report