5 ms·
Intuitively I would think so since 0K is a motionless state. By definition everything would be solid because nothing would be capable of e.g. filling a given vo
by eganist 6y ago
Intuitively I would think so since 0K is a motionless state. By definition everything would be solid because nothing would be capable of e.g. filling a given volume, or for that matter, doing any action at all.
But this isn't my field of expertise.
- dmitrygr 6y agoComplete lack of motion would violate Heisenberg uncertainty principle ("no motion" == "I know both momentum and location with zero uncertainty" and that's not allowed)
- whatshisface 6y agoNo, you can have zero momentum. However it comes along with having a position wavefunction that fills the whole universe.
- rrmm 6y agoHey let's probe the boundary conditions of the universe.
- NikolaeVarius 6y agoThe boundary condition is that at some arbitrary point god smacks you and tells you to knock it off
- outworlder 6y agoCareful now, you don't want to crash the simulation. It already slows down when you are moving too fast.
- dmitrygr 6y agoPrecisely. But that doesn't work for OP's question since the whole universe isn't at 0K.
- interestica 6y ago> However it comes along with having a position wavefunction that fills the whole universe. I love that this sentence exists. Because it's absurd and enlightening at the same time.
- jandrese 6y agoThe universe kindly requests that you do not divide by zero.
- Koshkin 6y agoBecause it does not want to be Bourne Again.