Absolute 0 Webster's New World Dictionary of Science
Copyright © 1998 Macmillan
quote:
absolute zero Lowest temperature theoretically possible, zero kelvin (0° K), equivalent to –273.15° C or –459.67° F,
at which molecules are at their lowest state.
Although the third law of thermodynamics indicates the impossibility of reaching absolute zero exactly, a temperature of 2.8 X 10-10 °K (0.28 billionth of a degree above absolute 0) was produced in1993, at Lancaster University, England.
Near absolute zero, the physical properties of some materials change substantially; for example, some metals lose their electrical resistance & become superconducting.
Temperature & Heat
Back in the chemistry classroom of college, we had formed study groups. We were discussing this concept of absolute zero but seemed to be laboring under a false perception. Because the teacher, overhearing our debate, made a similar statement 'Lowest temperature theoretically possible, at which the atom are at it's lowest state.' (?) {energy level}
1) We thought in theory any further reduction of energy would collapse into the structure of the nucleus?
2) Another thing we found strange was she hadn't identified the structure used as the measure of this lowest (energy state) temperature?
Having this question raised, I had replied by pointing to this concept but as I thought it through I wondered if 'was this her statement' or 'our perception of her statement'? As a student, this teacher had once taught me that I needed to learn (memorize) these concepts and that later, they would come to form a cohesive understanding (comprehension) of the subject. Therefore, I went back to the basics to rethink my understanding. I realized that I hadn't made the distinction between elemental species and molecular species when I had learned this concept. As a group, we accepted this definition and went on to discuss other concepts.
As such I thought, the simplest atom is hydrogen and therefore an atom containing an electron & a proton would have the least energy. So this atom (1S1 orbital) must represent the model that formed the bases for their computation? Which I accepted as the form of my misconception.
If I had thought about it, I might have had concerns like:
What about other elements such as metals? Don't they contract as they are cooled (lose energy), if they were supercooled to their lowest energy then do they remain at that temperature even in the presence of hydrogen being lowered in temperature?
As helium has a filled 1s orbital & exist as an individual atom, hydrogen forms a covalent bond with itself to form H2 molecules. Therefore, to reach hydrogen's lowest level, this covalent bond would have to be broken. This being the case, then no compounds would exist at or near absolute 0? (0° K)
If the basic hydrogen atom was to be lowered to a temperature (reduced into its atomic particles), would they exist as an ionic pair or would they compress into a neutron? Then would not other elements be reduced similarly as their energy was lowered? That after they reached their lowest state (in the presence of hydrogen) as the temperature was lowered they too would decompose into basic particle form?
On the other hand, neither I probably would have had these thoughts nor would I have considered the other possibilities. That if compounds exist at or near absolute 0? (0° K), then the lowest energy state (temperature) is not the measure of the least energy. Then how could a relatively small atom like hydrogen have an equivalent energy level to a massive atom of lead?
One of the things about chemistry is your thinking becomes polarized into certain lines of thoughts. As an example, chemical bonds form with what is called the valance shell electrons but all atoms have 1S orbital so we might fail to make this connection.
F.Y.C. – For your consideration: Suppose we were to place an ordinary piece of ice & crystalline salt within sealed containers in a walk-in freezer, effectively isolating it from changes in temperature from outside sources. Now we calculate the resonant frequency for the 2S orbital of the oxygen atom in the water molecule & set an rf generator (microwave) to emit only at this frequency. Using a directional antenna, we pass energy into the containers. Now we accept that the 2S orbital of the oxygen atom would absorb this energy but would the 1S orbital of the hydrogen or the 3S orbital within the Na & Cl of the salt? If not then we expect that the hydrogen bonded by an SP orbital to oxygen would transfer energy to the hydrogen & the water molecule as a whole would rise in temperature. As to the salt, we would consider that the 2S orbital of the closed shell absorbing the energy. This energy applies (pressure) energy to the valance shell expanding it. As these shells expand, the 1S orbital expands absorbing energy as well from the 2S orbital?
If we accept that these orbitals are energized by this radiation then we should consider that the energy held within various shells act to produce a (continuous emf wave) low level field which transfers energy at short inter & intra molecular distances? Just as emission of photons could be related to pulse radar, heat could be related to cw radar?
So we have thermolecular reactions forming bonds and Chemistry?
My Posts
35yrs • M • 
