THE OFFICIAL NATURALIST THREAD

[magnifier661]

I would like to have an official "naturalist" thread. Let's talk about science without Theist or Atheist views in this thread.

I will promise to not talk about God here as long as you all agree not to toss in Anti-theism in as well.

I know some may disagree, but I love learning and talking about science. Hey even jlpk can talk about his scientific observations of multi-dimensions!

Deal?

 

[magnifier661]

Lol I doubt this has as many hits as the God debates. You assholes love to argue!

 

[magnifier661]

I believe at absolute zero atoms stop moving. Since they can't be slowed more than stopped, there can be no colder temp.

Has zero atom movement ever been measured?

 

[barfo]

I will promise to not talk about God here

Deal?

And yet your first two posts in the thread mention God.

barfo

 

[magnifier661]

And yet your first two posts in the thread mention God.

barfo

As a rule book for the thread. Are you down or are you just wanting to argue about it? If so, you can meet me over there

 

[Further]

Has zero atom movement ever been measured?

I love the idea of a no theism/atheism thread.



I don't know if absolute zero has been achieved, but my guess is yes, since at the large hadron collider there are portions that need to be cooled I believe 2 degrees above absolute zero.

 

[barfo]

As a rule book for the thread. Are you down or are you just wanting to argue about it? If so, you can meet me over there

I already met you over there.

barfo

 

[Further]

http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=225

What is the closest to absolute zero that has ever been reached?. What would happen to a substance if it were cooled to absolute zero?
Answer 1:
Absolute zero is defined as zero degrees Kelvin. The closest recorded temperature to absolute zero that I could find is 0.0001K, for helium gas.
Your question about what would happen to an object cooled to absolute zero is a great one! All molecules are constantly in motion (the bonds between atoms are vibrating and changing shape). The speed of this motion is dependent on the temperature of the molecule. As you can probably guess, motion is faster at higher temperatures. Changes in molecule motion with temperature are responsible for phase changes. Water vaporizes at high temperatures because as the water molecules move faster they bump into one another more often, pushing each other away and taking up more and more space, eventually forming a gas (steam). Water freezes at low temperatures because as the water molecules slow down they coalesce, or come together like pieces in a puzzle to form a crystal- like matrix. (Why is ice LESS dense than water, then? If the molecules are moving slower, they should be closer together, right? Ice is less dense than water -- it floats -- because air becomes trapped into the matrix as the water molecules come together.)

Even when water freezes, the molecules are still vibrating. Only at absolute zero do molecules stop moving completely. What sort of phase change would this cause? According to Einstein, who based his work on an Indian physicist Satyendra Nath Bose, this would result in a completely new form of matter.

Albert Einstein speculated that when molecules stop moving, the atoms would fall together and merge into one atom. The individual atoms (oxygen and hydrogen, in the case of water) would loose their identities and form what Einstein called a "superatom", or what we now call a Bose-Einstein Condensate.

Last year, Carl E. Wieman at the University of Colorado in Boulder won the Nobel prise for his work on Bose-Einstein Condensates. To read more about Wieman's work, go to
http://www.news.cornell.edu/Chronicle/02/10.24.02/ Wieman

.............

 

[magnifier661]

I love the idea of a no theism/atheism thread.



I don't know if absolute zero has been achieved, but my guess is yes, since at the large hadron collider there are portions that need to be cooled I believe 2 degrees above absolute zero.

Wow! What materials can hold that temp? Seems like nothing can withstand it? Unless its temporary

 

[Further]

Albert Einstein speculated that when molecules stop moving, the atoms would fall together and merge into one atom. The individual atoms (oxygen and hydrogen, in the case of water) would loose their identities and form what Einstein called a "superatom", or what we now call a Bose-Ei

That is so bad ass

 

[Further]

Wow! What materials can hold that temp? Seems like nothing can withstand it? Unless its temporary

Not sure and I was going off memory, but I think kelvin is - 276 C and Liquid nitrogen is I think -210 degrees in liquid form.

 

[magnifier661]

That is so bad ass

That is so funny that you posted that the moment I asked "what material can hold that temp?"

 

[Further]

Ok, I looked it up, the superconducting magnets are cooled with liquid Helium to 1.9K

 

[Further]

http://home.web.cern.ch/about/engineering/cryogenics-low-temperatures-high-performance

The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is the largest cryogenic system in the world and one of the coldest places on Earth. All of the magnets on the LHC are electromagnets – magnets in which the magnetic field is produced by the flow of electric current. The LHC's main magnets operate at a temperature of 1.9 K (-271.3°C), colder than the 2.7 K (-270.5°C) of outer space.
The LHC's cryogenic system requires 40,000 leak-tight pipe seals, 40 MW of electricity – 10 times more than is needed to power a locomotive – and 120 tonnes of helium to keep the magnets at 1.9 K.
...................

 

[magnifier661]

Here's a question. There are parts of this universe where matter is almost non existent (not enough to make gas, water or even noticeable energy).

What if, if there was a way to get there, be present in that space? What would happen to our mass? Would it break apart the spaceship that took us there? Or would that space be able to travel faster than light, since the physics that limit motion "resistance" is not there?

 

[Further]

Don't know the first part but according to big Albert, nothing moves faster than light.

 

[magnifier661]

Don't know the first part but according to big Albert, nothing moves faster than light.

True, but it could be bent

 

[Further]

True, but it could be bent

I don't see how that would apply

 

[magnifier661]

I don't see how that would apply

Hypothetically, bending time and space would get you to point B faster than the speed of light traveling in a straight line.

In areas of little mass, bending that space would be much easier than "our solar system" for example.

 

[MarAzul]

Hypothetically, bending time and space would get you to point B faster than the speed of light traveling in a straight line.

In areas of little mass, bending that space would be much easier than "our solar system" for example.

I don't think we know squat about space and time and therefore how to travel. We know light can be bent but we assume a straight line when ever we look at something in space. Well hell perhaps the light travels in a spiral , around the source or the source of the power to bend it, and ever outward as with the big bang. Then it isn't so dam far if you jtrek, skipping forward in time with each track crossed. Ah but still way too far for man with such a short stay. Sounds like we need help from God again.

 

[Denny Crane]

I already met you over there.

barfo

veni, vidi, vici

 

[julius]

You want a thread about nudism?

 

[magnifier661]

You want a thread about nudism?

Yes

 

[BoBoBREWSKI]

Mags - zero interest in this thread unless it involves pics of your wife being a naturalist!

 

[Minstrel]

Here's a question. There are parts of this universe where matter is almost non existent (not enough to make gas, water or even noticeable energy).

What if, if there was a way to get there, be present in that space? What would happen to our mass? Would it break apart the spaceship that took us there?

We'd bring our own heat. We wouldn't survive long enough to see anything reach absolute zero, we'd die watching the spaceship creeper closer and closer to absolute zero, because it would take a long, long time. It may never get there within a finite time span, though I don't know for certain.

Or would that space be able to travel faster than light, since the physics that limit motion "resistance" is not there?

"Space" doesn't travel. If you mean the expansion of the universe, it's expanding faster than the speed of light (which is a restriction on things with mass, not something intangible like the border of the universe) but any space it leaves behind wouldn't theoretically be out of reach.

 

[magnifier661]

We'd bring our own heat. We wouldn't survive long enough to see anything reach absolute zero, we'd die watching the spaceship creeper closer and closer to absolute zero, because it would take a long, long time. It may never get there within a finite time span, though I don't know for certain.

So the area in which mass is close to absolute zero would theoretically act as a black hole? I'm not sure I follow you here.

"Space" doesn't travel. If you mean the expansion of the universe, it's expanding faster than the speed of light (which is a restriction on things with mass, not something intangible like the border of the universe) but any space it leaves behind wouldn't theoretically be out of reach.

from what I've remembered reading, the mass isn't moving like you wrote; but the space in between is. Meaning point a to point b moves farther apart (the space between) but the mass doesn't.

 

[Minstrel]

So the area in which mass is close to absolute zero would theoretically act as a black hole? I'm not sure I follow you here.

I'm saying that putting something with heat into an absolute zero temperature environment would cause the heat source to cool down quickly at first, but as it approached absolute zero, it would lose temperature very, very slowly and potentially never quite reach it, even as it kept creeping closer and closer to zero.

from what I've remembered reading, the mass isn't moving like you wrote; but the space in between is. Meaning point a to point b moves farther apart (the space between) but the mass doesn't.

I wasn't talking about the ability to warp space to get places, I was answering your question about whether the "space" would be moving at light speed.

As far as warping space, space still doesn't "travel" at a speed. The (slightly more realistic) idea is that the natural curvature of space could allow for "tunnels" that allow us to get from one spot in the universe to another much much faster than traveling across space conventionally. The other (more unrealistic) idea is that we could bend space at will to bring far away locations closer to us.]

If you mean all travel involves no motion by mass and all by space, I don't think that's the mainstream belief among physicists. That only makes sense as a possibility if there were a single mass in the universe...when there are lots of masses sharing the same general area and moving independently, it's hard to see how it could be the space moving to accommodate all the different motions.

 

[andalusian]

Don't know the first part but according to big Albert, nothing moves faster than light.

According to Douglas Adams dark moves faster than light. Everywhere light gets to, dark is already there.

 

[MARIS61]

True atheists are naturalists. They understand that nature is perfect.

Scientists are actually the anti-naturalists due to their failure to recognize the perfection in nature, arrogantly trying to thwart the natural process and always causing havoc by doing so.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

IMO the universe and how it came to be is beyond human comprehension.

Same goes for an afterlife dimention.

....If there is one.