I don’t quite understand it fully, but I think if we lowered a particle’s temperature to absolute zero, we would blow up the universe because of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, because we would know the exact velocity of the particle. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Yeah, that sounds about right.
I believe what MikeS is referring to is called a vacuum bubble instanton. I don’t seem to see anything on google about it though.
XWalrus2, IANAP but I think it would just puff up into an Einstein-Bose Condensate.
If just destroying the Earth is enough, we could just turn on & off the lights in all the buildings across the US to spell out “SCREW YOU GOD” or something similar across the face of the Earth. He’d smash us for sure.
Well, yeah, that’s pretty much wrong. Sorry.
First off, of course we can’t lower a particle’s temperature to absolute zero, so we’re safe on that count. Even if we did, there’s no reason to think that this would cause any real problems.
Secondly, due to unfortunate conceptions about ideal gases, people believe that 3/2 kT = 1/2 mv[sup]2[/sup], which isn’t generally the case; temperature is a measure of energy partitioning, not of velocity.
Finally, even if we were able to put in a particle into a state with zero momentum, we’d run into the little problem that we really wouldn’t have the faintest idea where it was. It’s not like Heisenberg’s principle is a technological limitation or a limitation on measurement. It’s a limitation on nature, and so we can’t violate it.
Cross the streams.
shouldn’t be too difficult. just nuke earth into dust and you destroy the universe, since we all know it revolves around us.
Just knowing its exact position wouldn’t violate Heisenberg’s Principle. What heisenberg said was that you couldn’t know (e.g.) the exact position and exact momentum at the same time
Even if you could lower a particle’s velocity [hence its momentum] to zero, you wouldn’t know where it was unless you observed it. That would involve some sort of interaction with a photon or particle, which would change its velocity or position, and you would no longer know where it is or its current momentum, you’d just know what these two qualities were - and you wouldn’t necessarily know them to infinite precision. Heisenberg is all about precision and accuracy. His principle really says that there is a necessary trade-off between measuring a particle’s position and momentum. There is a certain lower limit to the combined precision in any measurement of position and momentum [namely, h/2 or 3.323 x 10^-27 erg-sec]
It’s not that the universe will explode, you just can’t do it. You can’t observe something without interacting with it, and though you can design an experiment to minimize the interaction in one property, you can’t have zero interaction in all properties - because that’s no interaction at all, and hence, no observation at all - i.e. zero precision, not infinite precision. Any interaction must, by necessity change the properties of the object being measured to change the properties of the object you’re measuring with.
(though in strict logic, it can be proven that any conclusion, true or false, can be proven from any false premise, so saying that the universe would explode would be as accurate as anything else you said, proceeding fom the false premise of an impossible situation)
You don’t see this in daily life because the Heisenberg limit is so low.