If there is no energy, does time exist?

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by wegs, Jul 6, 2019.

  1. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    It's also a dimension like length and breadth.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    AGE

    Again I would go NO AGE

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    TabbyStar likes this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    Which you should know don't exist

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. TheFrogger Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,175
    Tabbystar could be onto something. At zero degrees time does not exist. Has anyone tried putting their phone, or a clock, in the freezer? Time slows. Observe as your phone SLOWLY scrolls through the menus.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    This begs the question: what if an animal, such as a fly, found it's way INTO a freezer? Would that animal become a time-traveller?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I am Brundlefrogger.
     
    TabbyStar likes this.
  8. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    It would have to be absolute absolutely zero

    I understand there was a experiment which brought a light wave to a halt by passing it though some very cold substance but to lazy to follow up

    Not sure that would be equivalent to stopping the atomic vibrations of atoms but I am guessing not

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. TabbyStar Registered Member

    Messages:
    74
    What fascinates me is if atomic activity somehow stopped, could/would it resume?

    Seems like everything, I have learned, indicates all contents of our observable universe are in constant motion. Galaxies, stars, planets, nebulas, atoms, elementary particles, etc. The only exception of non motion is this fast food worker at my local McDonalds

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Anyway, my understanding is we never have observed non motion.

    Hypothetically...if absolute zero could be reached...if all motion stopped...would increasing temperature start it all moving again? I wish I had closure on this but am totally mind blown!
     
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2019
  10. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    Numero uno observation ✓
    Only if the rubber band holding the atom together hadn't fractured

    Interesting question

    I am tempted to say no because the atom would have fallen apart (EXPLOSION? IMPLOSION?)

    But a falling apart atom seems unlikely so how much energy would be needed to be replaced to get above absolute zero?

    Seems like all it would take is one-half billionth degree

    ***********
    You see, when atoms gain energy through any means possible, they vibrate faster. Unless they are at absolute zero (0 Kelvin, which is -273.15°C/-459.67°F), atoms are always vibrating. In fact, temperature is just a measure of the average rate of vibration of a collection of molecules
    Researchers from NASA and MIT have cooled sodium gas to the lowest temperature ever recorded – one-half billionth degree above absolute zero.

    https://www.universetoday.com/8861/coldest-temperature-ever-created/

    See also

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_zero

    which indicates you can't stop atom vibrations

    and

    https://www-iflscience-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.iflscience.com/physics/coldest-temperature-universe-created-american-laboratory/amp.html?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQDoAEH#referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://www.iflscience.com/physics/coldest-temperature-universe-created-american-laboratory/
    **********

    Cheers

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    It's 4am in the middle so give me a break

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2019
    TabbyStar likes this.
  11. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,851
    You can't get to absolute zero in much the same way that you can't get to the speed of light.

    It also makes no sense to talk about planets spinning, stopping and restarting due to reaching absolute zero. It is true that everything is moving but that's about it.
     
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2019
    TabbyStar likes this.
  12. TabbyStar Registered Member

    Messages:
    74
    Agreed. I messed up including celestial bodies in motion being relative to the topic of absolute zero temperature and theorized effects from said temperatures. I have never read that anywhere (absolute zero even remotely affecting celestial body motion).

    My bad.
     
  13. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,851
    The real point is that you aren't going to get anything approaching absolute zero with a rotating planet.
     
    wegs likes this.
  14. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,253
    I'm trying to think of a hypothetical scenario for a system with energy...but then ''suddenly,'' there is no energy. The ''suddenly'' part might be tripping me up, but is that possible?
     
  15. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,851
    I can't think of a scenario with no energy unless it involves the Universe expanding for so long that gravity doesn't have enough to work with to form stars, all the stars burn out and cool off and there just is no movement and we do reach absolute zero (I'm not sure this is possible) and that's how you would get to no energy.

    I'm not sure that is even possible according to quantum physics.
     
  16. TheFrogger Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,175
    Are you calling God a vibrator (in that he must be vibrating due to the containment of energy?)
     
  17. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,451
    Wegs, I've just seen this. How much physics do you know? Because yes, action per unit time is indeed energy.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    wegs likes this.
  18. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,253
    I have another question relating to this...

    If there is no ''observer'' ...would time exist at all? Does time only exist when it's being observed?
     
    TheFrogger likes this.
  19. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,253
    I'm not an expert. I know enough, but not enough. lol
     
    exchemist likes this.
  20. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,451
    Even at absolute zero there would still be some motion. Everything would be in its ground state, but you would be left with zero point motion even so. For example hydrogen atoms would be in the ground state, but in that state the electrons would continue to circulate about the nucleus.

    The issue would be that no energy could flow, because that requires that some of it is not in a ground state.
     
    Seattle and river like this.
  21. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,451
    But you know the dimensions of action are energy x time?

    You are a dark horse.......

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  22. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,451
    No I don't think that would make any sense. All our models of the world presume time is a coordinate needed to define the evolution of systems. How could a statement such as "The big bang is thought to have occurred 14bn years ago", or "the frequency of the Lyman α line in the spectrum of hydrogen is 2.47 x 10¹⁵ Hz" have any meaning if time did not have an existence independent of an observer?

    In general I have real trouble with all these arguments one comes across whereby such-and-such is supposedly dependent on an observer. What count as an observer? A human being? A cat? a goldfish? A wasp? A bacterium?
     
  23. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,851
    An observer has nothing to do with anything. If we were talking about observing no motion you could argue that you can't have a person observing a Universe with no motion because a person is full of motion (it's alive!)

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page