Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> Well, the "zero-point energy" is (amongst other things) the remaining 
>> jiggle in atoms even at absolute-zero.
> 
>   Isn't that kind of contradictory with the very definition of absolute
> zero temperature? By definition if there's movement it's not absolute zero.

Only in layman's terms. Either you can't ever get to absolute zero, or 
there is a theoretical range where the energy is negative (said range 
also inaccessible in some sense).

But at this point you're pushing my knowlege of the subject.

>   Did Heisenberg really state that the principle applies at all possible
> temperatures, including absolute zero? 

I don't know. But look up "Bose-Einstein condensate", where you take one 
atom and make it about 10 feet across by getting it close enough to 
absolute zero.

 > Does it break some kind of universal
> law (like conservation of energy or conservation of momentum) if at absolute
> zero the uncertainty principle does not apply?

Honestly, I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised. I understand many 
of the conservation laws come from quantum measurements.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     It's not feature creep if you put it
     at the end and adjust the release date.

Post a reply to this message