Is absolute zero still 0 Kelvin?
Following the recent decision to change the definition of SI units, I understand that Kelvin is no longer defined in terms of the number 1/273.16. Does that mean that absolute zero is no longer necessarily 0K?
Edit: What are the proposed realizations in the New SI for the kilogram, ampere, kelvin and mole? is helpful but doesn’t address absolute zero.
temperature si-units metrology
asked Nov 17 '18 at 10:34
jl6
1395
add a comment |
Following the recent decision to change the definition of SI units, I understand that Kelvin is no longer defined in terms of the number 1/273.16. Does that mean that absolute zero is no longer necessarily 0K?
Edit: What are the proposed realizations in the New SI for the kilogram, ampere, kelvin and mole? is helpful but doesn’t address absolute zero.
temperature si-units metrology
asked Nov 17 '18 at 10:34
jl6
1395
Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/147433
– Chair
Nov 17 '18 at 10:40
1
@Chair But that is about all of the SI revision. This question is just about temperature.
– Pieter
Nov 17 '18 at 10:49
add a comment |
Following the recent decision to change the definition of SI units, I understand that Kelvin is no longer defined in terms of the number 1/273.16. Does that mean that absolute zero is no longer necessarily 0K?
Edit: What are the proposed realizations in the New SI for the kilogram, ampere, kelvin and mole? is helpful but doesn’t address absolute zero.
temperature si-units metrology
asked Nov 17 '18 at 10:34
jl6
1395
Following the recent decision to change the definition of SI units, I understand that Kelvin is no longer defined in terms of the number 1/273.16. Does that mean that absolute zero is no longer necessarily 0K?
Edit: What are the proposed realizations in the New SI for the kilogram, ampere, kelvin and mole? is helpful but doesn’t address absolute zero.
temperature si-units metrology
temperature si-units metrology
asked Nov 17 '18 at 10:34
jl6
1395
asked Nov 17 '18 at 10:34
jl6
1395
edited Nov 17 '18 at 12:52
asked Nov 17 '18 at 10:34
jl6
1395
asked Nov 17 '18 at 10:34
jl6
1395
asked Nov 17 '18 at 10:34
jl6
1395
1395
Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/147433
– Chair
Nov 17 '18 at 10:40
1
@Chair But that is about all of the SI revision. This question is just about temperature.
– Pieter
Nov 17 '18 at 10:49
add a comment |
Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/147433
– Chair
Nov 17 '18 at 10:40
1
@Chair But that is about all of the SI revision. This question is just about temperature.
– Pieter
Nov 17 '18 at 10:49
Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/147433
– Chair
Nov 17 '18 at 10:40
Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/147433
– Chair
Nov 17 '18 at 10:40
1
1
@Chair But that is about all of the SI revision. This question is just about temperature.
– Pieter
Nov 17 '18 at 10:49
@Chair But that is about all of the SI revision. This question is just about temperature.
– Pieter
Nov 17 '18 at 10:49
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
No, it means that the triple point of water is not defined as exactly 273.16 kelvin when the new definition takes effect in May. The revision fixes the value of the Boltzmann constant. Zero remains zero.
The practical temperature scale ITS-90 (for calibrating thermometers) has not changed by this decision. In the future, maybe a different method of calibration will be prescribed for ambient temperatures, but that is not likely to be anytime soon. In that sense, the triple point of water remains at 273.16 K.
edited Nov 17 '18 at 13:47
Emilio Pisanty
82.1k21199411
answered Nov 17 '18 at 10:46
Pieter
7,59731431
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "151"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f441484%2fis-absolute-zero-still-0-kelvin%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
No, it means that the triple point of water is not defined as exactly 273.16 kelvin when the new definition takes effect in May. The revision fixes the value of the Boltzmann constant. Zero remains zero.
The practical temperature scale ITS-90 (for calibrating thermometers) has not changed by this decision. In the future, maybe a different method of calibration will be prescribed for ambient temperatures, but that is not likely to be anytime soon. In that sense, the triple point of water remains at 273.16 K.
edited Nov 17 '18 at 13:47
Emilio Pisanty
82.1k21199411
answered Nov 17 '18 at 10:46
Pieter
7,59731431
add a comment |
No, it means that the triple point of water is not defined as exactly 273.16 kelvin when the new definition takes effect in May. The revision fixes the value of the Boltzmann constant. Zero remains zero.
The practical temperature scale ITS-90 (for calibrating thermometers) has not changed by this decision. In the future, maybe a different method of calibration will be prescribed for ambient temperatures, but that is not likely to be anytime soon. In that sense, the triple point of water remains at 273.16 K.
edited Nov 17 '18 at 13:47
Emilio Pisanty
82.1k21199411
answered Nov 17 '18 at 10:46
Pieter
7,59731431
add a comment |
No, it means that the triple point of water is not defined as exactly 273.16 kelvin when the new definition takes effect in May. The revision fixes the value of the Boltzmann constant. Zero remains zero.
The practical temperature scale ITS-90 (for calibrating thermometers) has not changed by this decision. In the future, maybe a different method of calibration will be prescribed for ambient temperatures, but that is not likely to be anytime soon. In that sense, the triple point of water remains at 273.16 K.
edited Nov 17 '18 at 13:47
Emilio Pisanty
82.1k21199411
answered Nov 17 '18 at 10:46
Pieter
7,59731431
No, it means that the triple point of water is not defined as exactly 273.16 kelvin when the new definition takes effect in May. The revision fixes the value of the Boltzmann constant. Zero remains zero.
The practical temperature scale ITS-90 (for calibrating thermometers) has not changed by this decision. In the future, maybe a different method of calibration will be prescribed for ambient temperatures, but that is not likely to be anytime soon. In that sense, the triple point of water remains at 273.16 K.
edited Nov 17 '18 at 13:47
Emilio Pisanty
82.1k21199411
answered Nov 17 '18 at 10:46
Pieter
7,59731431
edited Nov 17 '18 at 13:47
Emilio Pisanty
82.1k21199411
edited Nov 17 '18 at 13:47
Emilio Pisanty
82.1k21199411
edited Nov 17 '18 at 13:47
Emilio Pisanty
82.1k21199411
82.1k21199411
answered Nov 17 '18 at 10:46
Pieter
7,59731431
answered Nov 17 '18 at 10:46
Pieter
7,59731431
answered Nov 17 '18 at 10:46
Pieter
7,59731431
7,59731431
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f441484%2fis-absolute-zero-still-0-kelvin%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/147433
– Chair
Nov 17 '18 at 10:40
1
@Chair But that is about all of the SI revision. This question is just about temperature.
– Pieter
Nov 17 '18 at 10:49