absolute zero, the lowest temperature possible
- Thread starter PG1995
- Start date
Wow, great answer... :/
I'm not entirely sure of which query you need help with.
Remember the Kelvin scale is just a scale, it just doesn't have any minus figures, because its 0 value is the lowest value possible. Celcius and Farenheit also measure temperature, but they have their 0 points and the difference between each value is different.
As far as I'm aware, Kelvin estimated absolute zero by using the laws of thermodynamics. He created the scale which uses the same seperation as celcius, just moving the 0 degrees down to where absolute zero is. Of course, this means at higher temperatures, there's not much different in celcius and Kelvin - two hundred and something degrees isn't much when look at stars!
I'm not entirely sure of which query you need help with.
Remember the Kelvin scale is just a scale, it just doesn't have any minus figures, because its 0 value is the lowest value possible. Celcius and Farenheit also measure temperature, but they have their 0 points and the difference between each value is different.
As far as I'm aware, Kelvin estimated absolute zero by using the laws of thermodynamics. He created the scale which uses the same seperation as celcius, just moving the 0 degrees down to where absolute zero is. Of course, this means at higher temperatures, there's not much different in celcius and Kelvin - two hundred and something degrees isn't much when look at stars!
Actually, Kelvin isn't just a scale. It is very different from either Fahrenheit or Celsius. Like the Rankine scale, it is an absolute, not a relative, scale and this has significant implications.
For instance, the statement "it's twice as hot today as yesterday" is nonsensical if the basis for the claim is that it was 32°F yesterday and it's 64°F today. Would someone that uses the Celsius scale make the same claim? Notice that this isn't an issue with most measurement scales we use everyday. People would agree that the distance between these two points is twice as great as between those two points regardless of whether they are making the measurement in feet, miles, kilometers, parsecs, rods, or furlongs. But if someone says that the average kinetic energy of the particles that make up one object is twice that of another object, everyone will agree that the temperature of the first object, on any absolute temperature scale, is twice that of the other.
For instance, the statement "it's twice as hot today as yesterday" is nonsensical if the basis for the claim is that it was 32°F yesterday and it's 64°F today. Would someone that uses the Celsius scale make the same claim? Notice that this isn't an issue with most measurement scales we use everyday. People would agree that the distance between these two points is twice as great as between those two points regardless of whether they are making the measurement in feet, miles, kilometers, parsecs, rods, or furlongs. But if someone says that the average kinetic energy of the particles that make up one object is twice that of another object, everyone will agree that the temperature of the first object, on any absolute temperature scale, is twice that of the other.
