I understand that mathematically it is impossible because 0 implies the inverse of infinity (ie: 1/(infinity) ). We could theoretically achieve 1/(1x10^ 2000) deg Kelvin, but not be anywhere close to absolute zero. "The unattainability of absolute zero" I also have heard that it is possible to attain negative absolute temperatures, but I believe it deals with quantum statistical mechanics calculations; dont know that it is a "real" (ie: measurable with a thermometer) phenomena.
__________________
"Consensus Science got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?" : Rephrase of Will Rogers Comment
Sadly for the ambitious the Laws of Thermodynamics get in the way, and a way to do it has not been found.
__________________
"Did you get my e-mail?" - "The biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place" - George Bernard Shaw, 1856
Supercooling simply refers to cooling a substance below its freezing point. You can take very pure water and slowly cool it, careful not to have any disturbances and, if you're lucky, get it to perhaps -1°C. Then, toss a piece of ice or salt into the water and water it suddenly freeze.
You cannot cool a substance below 0°K. Lasers are sometimes referred to as having a negative temperature, but that doesn't mean the same thing as you are probably thinking of.
Have you looked at Wiki before posting what appears to be a homework question?
__________________
"Well, I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and I'm happy to state I finally won out over it." Elwood P. Dowd
Well lets see 0 0K is the absence of all heat. (no such thing as cold only a perspective) so how do you get less heat than no heat? A quantum material that has to absorb some amount of heat before it responds by warming up?
Maybe Dark matter but the odds are not good
Brad
__________________
(Larrabee's Law) Half of everything you hear in a classroom is crap. Education is figuring out which half is which.
I was under the impression that one should state temperature as 0,1 etc Kelvin and not 0 DEG Kelvin, 10 Deg Kelvin etc i.e. not Deg Kelvin - is this correct ?
In the SI absolute temperature has a special name named after the physisist Kelvin and the deg or its shorthand o is must not be used. The same applies to the imperial system where R (Rankin) is the special name.
Gosh!... to me this will be cooling the substance you are working with to a lower temperature than the neccessaraly one you really needed to achieved your purposes. This will be made by the use of a bigger evaporator or in others words with an extra heat exchanging capacity in order to achieve that supercooled effect ( Vapor-Liquid ). Latent and Sensible heat technically speaking to make a long story short. You will get it here with the help of these Pro's here at CR-4, You have the Technology,absolutly.
mohfar, where did you read this term? or in which context?
Maybe the reference is made to cooling to very low temperatures, near 0 K (The deg. K doesn't exist: the S.I. unit for temperature is just Kelvin. not degree Kelvin).
You cannot reach 0 K, (and even less a negative value of temperature expressed in Kelvin), it's the same problem when you try to get a speed greater than light speed, getting a negative mass or a friction factor greater than unity: physic laws.
Kind regards
__________________
It's stupid to discuss about AI: We´ve reached by the "B" way. We' ve producing men as clever as machines.