English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I mean 0K means no molecular movement. Temperature increases as molecular movement increases and vice-versa. Since there is a maximun speed for movement (speed of light) shouldn't there be a maximum temperature? If yes what is it?

2006-12-18 00:18:04 · 13 answers · asked by Dimitrios 2 in Science & Mathematics Physics

13 answers

Some scientists hold that the Planck temperature, which is calculated using other dimensions that are fundamental limits, is the maximum temperature, and was in fact the temperature at the instant of the Big Bang. This temperature is 1.41679 x 10^32 K.

2006-12-24 14:22:54 · answer #1 · answered by DavidK93 7 · 0 0

There's a web site called "Ask a scientist" and they have the answer, as follows:

It is certainly true that increasing the temperature will eventually cause combustion but this does not limit the temperature -- it just indicates the limit of the temperatures that a particular combination of materials can withstand.

The only limitation to the upper end of the temperature scale would be the limitation of the available energy.

=================
There is no maximum temperature. Temperature is a measure of the average kinetic energy of particles, which can be no less than zero (hence absolute zero), but there is no upper limit.

It is true that at high enough temperatures, things like molecules and even atoms will fly apart into their constituents. That does not mean that the pieces can't still move even faster. So any given material may not endure at high temperatures, but that does not at all mean that even higher temperatures aren't possible.

2006-12-18 08:27:12 · answer #2 · answered by jd 4 · 2 0

jd has a good answer.. although since the only limit to a temperature is the amount of available energy and we know that it's not possible to have an infinite amount of energy.. there is some upper limit. I would guess that it has something to do with c ( the speed of light ).. as heat is in actuality vibrational motion of the particles involved. Since nothing can exceed C, the speed of light, and you can not accelerate anything with a mass to C, then the maximum temperature of anything is the temp at which it's atomic motion approaches C. Only with infinite energy can you accelerate an object with a mass to C. And since infinity is an absurd concept.. well, you see where this leads.

2006-12-18 08:57:03 · answer #3 · answered by Louis G 6 · 1 0

You may have a top speed for a bicycle, but it is not the same as the top speed of a car or plane. We do know that the temperature generated at the time of the big bang was massive and chances are those temperatures will not be seen again in the lifetime of the universe. I would consider that the upper limit, but I have no scientific argument that I can use to support the concept.

2006-12-18 09:21:01 · answer #4 · answered by Mr Cellophane 6 · 0 1

There is no maximum temperature. Temperature is a measure of the average kinetic energy of particles, which can be no less than zero (hence absolute zero), but there is no upper limit.

It is true that at high enough temperatures, things like molecules and even atoms will fly apart into their constituents. That does not mean that the pieces can't still move even faster. So any given material may not endure at high temperatures, but that does not at all mean that even higher temperatures aren't possible.

2006-12-18 08:26:07 · answer #5 · answered by jingobinngo 2 · 2 1

No, there is no maximum temperature because temperature isn't really related to speed. It is related to energy. Energy per molecule can increase without limit even as speed is limited because mass increases to infinity as speed approaches the speed of light.

2006-12-18 10:17:15 · answer #6 · answered by campbelp2002 7 · 1 0

There is no known maximum temperature. Even though the speed of light is finite, the kinetic energy is unbounded as speed approaches that of light. Since the temperature is proportional to the average kinetic energy, there is no upper bound for it.

2006-12-18 08:53:28 · answer #7 · answered by mathematician 7 · 2 0

YES.. I do believe that there can be a maximum in temperature and even above that of flowing lava from a volcano. I do know that on earth....the hottest temperature ever recorded anywhere on the globe (136 F at Al' Aziziyah, Libya in September of 1922) occurred well before global warming was a buzzword, and despite the recent series of warm years, globally, these records have not seriously threatened.

I remember that I was in the desert of the (lower Sahara) and I actually DID FRY AN EGG in the sand... I did not have a thermometer but I thought at the time that it was even hotter than the 136 degrees.. more like 145 degrees.

2006-12-18 08:26:36 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

There is a maximum temperature, but it's not a fundamental limit. Consider any system of particles. You can always add energy to it and increase its energy level (therefore temperature). To calculate the temperature limit of that system, calculate the total energy in all of the rest of the universe and add that to your system. Then, using E = mc^2 and assuming 100% efficiency, calculate the energy equivalent of converting all of the rest of the mass in the universe to energy, and add that to your system. Then, calculate the temperature of your system from its energy. That's the maximum temperature of your system.

It's not a fundamental limit. Should you later discover that there's another 'universe' right next door to yours, simply add all of its energy to your system and calculate a new maximum temperature.

2006-12-18 11:57:10 · answer #9 · answered by Frank N 7 · 0 0

The temperature reached if the gravitational pull of all matter in the universe became great enough to cause it to collapse upon itself into a singular point. How could you get hotter than that!?

2006-12-18 09:47:33 · answer #10 · answered by captainskully2000 1 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers