May 8th, 2012, 02:27 PM
I have been pondering for a long while what would happen when all the movement of an atom is being stopped, by EM vibration or by some kind of freezing proces.
So, what would happen when an atom, electron, core, and everything in between would stop vibrating and spinning?
Is it even possible to achieve that, in theory?
How can it be done?
The best you can do is get the atom into its lowest possible quantum state. Stuff has been cooled to quite close. From Wikipedia:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Absolute zero cannot be achieved artificially, although it is possible to reach temperatures close to it through the use of cryocoolers. The use of laser cooling has produced temperatures less than a billionth of a kelvin.[8] At very low temperatures in the vicinity of absolute zero, matter exhibits many unusual properties, including superconductivity, superfluidity, and Bose–Einstein condensation. To study such phenomena, scientists have worked to obtain even lower temperatures.
- The current world record was set in 1999 at 100 picokelvins (pK), or 0.000 000 000 1 of a Kelvin, by cooling the nuclear spins in a piece of rhodium metal.[9]
- In November 2000, nuclear spin temperatures below 100 pK were reported for an experiment at the Helsinki University of Technology's Low Temperature Lab. However, this was the temperature of one particular degree of freedom – a quantum property called nuclear spin – not the overall average thermodynamic temperature for all possible degrees in freedom.[10][11]
- In February 2003, the Boomerang Nebula was observed to have been releasing gases at a speed of 500,000 km/h (over 300,000 mph) for the last 1,500 years. This has cooled it down to approximately 1 K, as deduced by astronomical observation, which is the lowest natural temperature ever recorded.[12]
- In May 2005, the European Space Agency proposed research in space to achieve femto-kelvin temperatures.[13]
- In May 2006, the Institute of Quantum Optics at the University of Hanover gave details of technologies and benefits of femto-kelvin research in space.[14]
I was speaking off a hypothical scenario, not 0K, but far cooler then that. At a point where (in my theory) the atom would implode, and exert energy. This could be used as the ultimate power scource.
But my question is, is this idea a possibility, or can it be disproved?
As to my method of achieving this, is mimicking every motion in an atom, and then reversing it, and thus stopping all motion completely. I also know einstein was working on something similar, and he could not get past the unpredictability of the very small, how about we guiding an atom so it can only vibrate in one way, and an electron would not be evenly divided across it's cloud.
Is this a valid idea?
If you have taken it to 0K then you have removed all the energy (which is why you can't go colder than that). So where would this energy come from? (And why would the atom implode, anyway?)Originally Posted by Zwolver
All kinetic energy would pass, and become radiation of energy. An atom would implode, because (in my head) i compare it to planets, circling in orbit, if they would cease circling, they would crash, and releasing energy. The whole potential --> Kinetic energy thing. Atoms on the other hand, can't exert kinetic energy if they cease to exist, as having no, or no valid mass, they should radiate this energy.If you have taken it to 0K then you have removed all the energy (which is why you can't go colder than that). So where would this energy come from? (And why would the atom implode, anyway?)
Electrons in atoms do not go around in circles (quite different from planets). They have energy levels. When you cool an atom, all electrons will end up at the minimum energy level - they will not fall into the nucleus.All kinetic energy would pass, and become radiation of energy. An atom would implode, because (in my head) i compare it to planets, circling in orbit, if they would cease circling, they would crash, and releasing energy. The whole potential --> Kinetic energy thing. Atoms on the other hand, can't exert kinetic energy if they cease to exist, as having no, or no valid mass, they should radiate this energy.If you have taken it to 0K then you have removed all the energy (which is why you can't go colder than that). So where would this energy come from? (And why would the atom implode, anyway?)
Where is this scourced? Has this been confirmed?
Yes, by the last 50 years of observations...
The Bohr model (planetary type orbits) was left in the dust nearly a century ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_configuration
Worth noting that each electron will fall to the lowest energy level that it can have. Because of the Pauli exclusion principle only two electrons can occupy the very lowest energy state. The next pair electrons will have to settle for a slightly higher energy state as their minimum, and so on.
I don't mean the model of electrons, i know their mass and location is dispersed around the cloud evenly, but i'm speaking off, what if we could imbalance that model? As fusion will never be a viable energy scource, i'm looking for alternatives. Total atomic degradation (this idea), and improving algae to generate more petrolium (synthetic fossile fuel idea) and be less susceptible to weather conditions are my only 2 options of coming up with an idea.
With proof, i mean, that electrons will and the core will not implode if no kinetic energy is present in the atom. If no kinetic energy (EM energy) would stop me, i can walk trough walls. But i could not exist, as my molecules would have no bonds.
I'm thinking of a simplistic model to this, just 1 atom, and stopping it's clock.
Ok, this is a little more usefull. So, an electron can't have less energy, because?? Else it is something else then an electron? What would it become?Worth noting that each electron will fall to the lowest energy level that it can have. Because of the Pauli exclusion principle only two electrons can occupy the very lowest energy state. The next pair electrons will have to settle for a slightly higher energy state as their minimum, and so on.
Because they obey "Fermi-Dirac statistics"; one of the results of this is that no two electrons can have exactly the same state. Two electrons in an atom can have the same energy if they have opposite spin. (This gets slightly more complex in the higher electron orbitals as other quantum numbers have to be taken into account).
Else what? Else nothing.
Well, not quite. In the extreme conditions of a neutron star, there are no electrons only neutrons (approximately) - you can think of the electrons and protons being squashed together to form neutrons but it is a bit more complex than that.
Better stick with the algae, then.
It sucks to be JUST a biologist. There is so much more then simply living organisms. And on to physics, i did applied physics for a year, failed it at math, but i still was intrigued by it's uses. And as for now, only a very few applications are found for recent discovered properties, only weapons seem to be researched by physics.
That is certainly the largest source of funding (sadly) but it is not the only area of research. There are many new developments in other areas - electronics, astronomy, power generation, medicine ... (Although not many headline-making "breakthroughs" - oh how I hate that word). Some of these benefit from the research done with military funding, much of which is published.
I had to give up studying physics as well because my math wasn't good enough. I blamed my teachers for a while but I have come to the conclusion it is me!
I want nothing and have everything. I am going somewhere called nowhere. I am known and unknown. When the atom stops animation ceases, and a new cycle starts. There is only transformation that limits confirmation.
It sounds good, but is it science?
That's theoretically impossibe
Note: the subject of temperature didn't come up in the first post.
Last edited by John Galt; June 6th, 2012 at 09:13 AM. Reason: Successive posts from the same member
| « Irradiance distribution of an optical system with Gaussian source using fft functions | Trajectory of a jet of water » |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
1Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
