How can “absolute zero” be proven?

exchemist said:
None of the inert gases (Helium, Neon, Argon, Krypton,Xenon, Radon) easily forms normal chemical bonds. All of them are monatomic gases. That is because all of them have complete outer shells of electrons. There are no "vacancies" in the outermost shell, ready to be filled by sharing electrons with another atom, which is what happens in chemical bonding.

This rule gets a bit weaker, however, with the larger members of the series, e.g. Xenon, which has some empty electron orbitals, not too much higher in energy, into which electrons can be promoted, leaving behind a gap which can be used to form bonds.

This Morse potential can however also be applied to the much weaker attraction due to London "dispersion" forces. These are not chemical bonds, but a feeble attraction due to a sort of flickering of tiny partial electric charges on neighbouring atoms due to the motion of their electrons (or to uncertainty in their position). There is a Wiki article on this here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_dispersion_force. in which you will see the good old Morse potential, or something very similar, pops up yet again.

These dispersion forces produce an attraction between molecules that causes molecular substances to condense into liquid and finally the solid state.
Click to expand...
You’ve helped me gain greater confidence in understanding this, but I need to delve deeper into the intricacies of these rules. I appreciate your patience actually, as my questions might seem silly on the surface.
 
foghorn said:
I would say the photon density in an area not space itself.
If you were looking for Absolute Zero, would you shield the experiment from the affects of the CMB photons? If yes, then why?


I was reading a book on helium and I couldn't put it down.
Click to expand...
Arf arf.

I suspect the problem is you can’t shield anywhere from CMB photons, because the shield would itself be at a minimum of 2.7K.
 
wegs said:
You’ve helped me gain greater confidence in understanding this, but I need to delve deeper into the intricacies of these rules. I appreciate your patience actually, as my questions might seem silly on the surface.
Click to expand...
Far from it. I’m probably going far too far into all this and boring you, but I seldom get a chance to talk chemistry here!
 
exchemist said:
Far from it. I’m probably going far too far into all this and boring you, but I seldom get a chance to talk chemistry here!
Click to expand...
Not boring at all! I got a little off track about helium.
 
wegs said:
Not boring at all! I got a little off track about helium.
Click to expand...
I have been locked out of the site but I am back now and ready to post. You were talking about states of matter, solid liquid and gas - there is another plasma.
Lots of it in stars so the most abundant "phase" of matter in the universe. (of normal matter)

I would check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bose–Einstein_condensate

Some history and features. Also check out the little graphic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top