The Planck Temperature: How hot can the Universe get?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 มิ.ย. 2024
- The Planck Temperature - Absolute Hot: What is the hottest temperature possible.
Today I’m going to look at the Planck Temperature and it’s about to get very strange. Let’s find out more.
Planck temperature is what we think is the highest temperature possible. It is the temperature at which our understanding of the universe breaks.
In this video we’re going to try to imagine just how hot that is, and what the implications of this value are. In order to do this, we’re going to look at some other very hot things to compare.
Cup of tea image by TerriC
pixabay.com/photos/tea-cup-vi...
Desert image by photo-graphe
pixabay.com/photos/desert-lan...
LHC tunnel image by Maximilien Brice at CERN, used under creative commons CC 4.0
cds.cern.ch/record/1211045
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
LHC ATLAS calorimeter by Maximilien Brice at CERN, used under creative commons CC 4.0
cds.cern.ch/record/910381?ln=en
creativecommons.org/licenses/... - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
Everyone's already mentioned how great your content is, so I just want to take a moment to talk about how great the commenters here are - after seeing almost every educational video on youtube bombarded with absurd top-voted comments about jokes, memes and other rubbish, it's so refreshing to see a comment section where I continue to learn from what people share. You guys (the creator and the viewers) are absolutely amazing. I especially loved David Pysnik and z beeblebrox's comments!
This is an absolutely top comment and I wholeheartedly agree. The community that is building up here is amazing, the vast majority of commenters and their comments are adding immeasurably to the video. I really appreciate the time and effort people take to help others with their understanding (and do it better than I could). People also make excellent constructive suggestions to help me improve my videos. The quality of comments here is truly superb, and I thank each and every one of you (even if I can't do it individually). I really feel like a community is developing here of people who are willing to get involved in meaningful discussions. Thank you everyone!
@@LearningCurveScience legend replying 1 year later
I do apologize if this is going to ruffle some feathers, but this comment. Some of science greatest contributor’s were people who loved jokes and pranks. They contributed so much to human knowledge and still maintained a sense of humor, and plenty were humble. I mean, Stephen Hawking and Albert Einstein were men known for their sense of humor. I’m pretty sure Stephen Hawking loved meme culture. Pretty sure that some of the greatest minds from the past would be out here sh*t posting while at the same time making huge leaps and bounds in their areas.
@@nothereforit.605 @Not here for it. I get what you're saying, and I agree that some very smart people do enjoy the humor of the puns, memes, jokes etc. (And several smart people may make those jokes), but I do think that the OP has a point. I've been reading through the comments just for this video and there is, in general, a much higher intellectually rigorous posts to not serious posts ratio. Not saying one is better than the other, both are fun and enjoyable depending on your mood and personality, but it's nice to read and see lots of really well thought out, intelligent posts. It feels like a continuation of why I came to see this video in the first place: to learn something and have new knowledge, concepts and ideas presented to me.
Though I do love say Kurgezut in a nutshell, both the video and the goofy jokes/humor in the comments.
TBH, it would be kinda nice if there was 2 separate comment sections for fun and jokes and serious discussion.
NO!
It’s amazing to consider that, in the “recent” history of the universe, both the hottest and coldest temperature to be found anywhere for a given time might have been right in the vicinity of earth and produced by humans.
That said on the premise that we are the only intelligent species in the whole of the universe. Given the abundance of other galaxies in the universe I remain open to the idea that there might be others "out there".
Given the magnets in the LHC are cooled with liquid helium, the hottest and coldest temperatures at that moment would have been a few centimetres away from each other!
satyris410 It’s always interesting when opposite extremes like this happen in close vicinities. Another one that comes to my mind is how the accretion discs of black holes (the definitively darkest objects of the universe) lying just beyond their event horizons are ironically the most luminous objects due to the extreme gravitational and frictional forces exerted on accreting matter, generating intense blackbody radiation, as well as (iirc) any stray photons which temporarily orbit and thus accumulate around the black hole in the photon sphere reflecting off of any accreting matter in great amount (adding some luminosity). Vsauce made a video on this.
That said, regarding your claim, the liquid helium cooling the LHC is not a Bose-Einstein condensate and so is definitely not the *coldest* temperature reached/recorded, though it seems relatively close on human and universal temperature scales of course.
Wait we produced the coldest and hottest?
What a time to be alive
As a physicist, I just need to correct one thing! The hottest temperature ever found on earth is that hot pizza cheese hitting the roof of your mouth. This can be read about in Planck's "Hot Pocket Theorem." I am sorry, I will go away now. 😁
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
You speak facts!
About 60% of this sentence shouldn't have existed lol
I still think fresh tomato on hot pizza hitting your lower lip exceeds that temp.
I think you'll find the hottest temperature is pineapple on a pizza.
3:54 Also a fun consequence of the universe starting out extremely hot and cooling to its current very cold state, is if you go far enough back into the past, you MUST reach a point where the entire universe was room temperature. This was about 15 million years after the Big Bang. Stuck in deep space? Just snag yourself an oxygen mask and a t-shirt and you'll be fine! Don't even worry about getting thirsty, all the water in the universe is liquid right now!
thats a nice idea, but space would of still been a vacuum. So your blood would boil and you would stroke out in seconds.
@@ricksanchez9669 Luckily since our body is an airtight system, your blood can only boil wherever it's exposed to the vacuum. So just don't get scratched. And wear goggles. They WILL do something!
@@z-beeblebrox you have some gaps in your knowledge my friend. Your blood will boil in your veins. Your body has these giant openings called lungs. Google what happens to a human in hard vacuum.
@@ricksanchez9669 No, I'm afraid you do. The circulatory system is by its nature, like many things in the human body, sealed off from the outside world. This is, in fact, why we bleed, as this seal represents a pressure differential. While our lungs are *obviously* not sealed from the outside world and air would be violently expelled from your lungs in vacuum (which is why you shouldn't hold your breath), it is nethertheless a fact that the nodules carrying oxygen molecules from the lungs to the bloodstream are too small to represent a leak in this seal. There is in fact a TON of misconceptions about hard vacuum and pop science looooves to oogle how gruesome it would be such that it fails to realize that it actually wouldn't be. You'd just die of asphyxiation like you'd naively expect. You won't spontaneously boil, you won't explode, you won't get turned inside out or instantly freeze (THAT'S a whole discussion about how bad people are at understanding direct vs convective radiation!), and you won't get struck dead by cosmic rays unless you're lottery-winner lucky. You just run out of air. That's it.
@@z-beeblebrox look into the bends. Essentially a loss in pressure causes the air thats naturally disolved in our blood to come out of solution and fill our blood vessels with pokets of air.
Yes, our bodies are air tight, but that doesnt mean they handle preasure very well.
Interesting, so if you heat the fabric of reality up to the planck temperature it spontaneously forms black holes or to think another way, cavities are created in the fabric of spacetime. This would be akin to when liquids are almost boiling, so you could make the conjecture that if you heat anything to the planck temperature you've reached the boiling point of reality itself.
"the boiling point of reality" I'm gonna steal that
@@the_seer_0421 Same
Wonderful metaphor
The fabric of reality would be the fabric of space.
And the fabric of space has no temperature of any kind.
What we measure the temperature of is the particles in space.
And just like a boiling point, the system won’t get any hotter until it’s all boiled away. Except it can’t, then, because once everything has been converted into hawking radiation, there’s nothing left to heat-just empty space.
This does give a really good accurate and intuitive description of why the Planck Temperature is physically impassable.
We need to help and promote channels like this, pure science with no clickbaits, just awesome content full of information. Keep up the good work and thank you!
Thank you very much, what a lovely comment. I try my best and really enjoy it when people enjoy my videos
that is exactly my thought, too ... and it is so good explained and easy to understand. i think it could be up there with veritassium, be smart, smarter every day, the action lab or PBS SPacetime and whoever there is :D
Yeah but it has so much filler... was all that stuff about earth's temperature really needed?
@@nopejhonson958 . Totally necessary . Contextual .
@@nopejhonson958 Yes. You start a building from its foundations, not the roof.
THEY FINALLY DID IT!
A non click-bait channel without sensationalism and hyperbole. All meat, no filler, and understandable.
Thanks for the great info, and staying realistic by acknowledging more "learned" people and asking for input. Can't help there, lol. Great video
Isaac arthur is also non click bait science channel. Good watch. Highly recommend
Thank you, that's a lovely comment. I try to stick to the facts, and hopefully still make it entertaining. It can be a fine line at times. I'm glad you enjoyed the video.
@@spencervance8484 alweady subsqwibe!
I'd also recommend Science Asylum.
@@LearningCurveScience You do a good job. Subscribed.
A few people have mentioned it, so I thought I'd pin a comment up here. Please be aware there are a couple of possible jump scares at roughly 5.40 and 12.40 (sorry about that). And again, a massive thank you for watching!!
This video is absolutely fascinating, thank you so much for taking the time to make this video!!
Err.. A lightning bolt and a screen transition? Is your audience really so fragile? People switching on lights and coming through doorways must be terrifying to these people.
@@datapoint6859 lol
@@datapoint6859 he meant 12:36
timestamps are made with ":"
5:40 12:40
Adding a delay to the thunder after the lightning strike at 5:41 was such a nice detail! Your attention to detail is great :)
it made me jump lol
when you actually understand the physics that you know, it just feels wrong to brake the laws of nature. instinct is an evolving thing.
@@Bug_Abuse same. it scared tf outta me! glad i'm not alone. It was just such a quiet chill video then BANG. sounded like it was actually outside my window
The delay would be less because the temperature and pressure is greater than on Earth
@@windowsxpmemesandstufflol true, very true. But we could assume that the lightning is further away than we would think on Earth from that time delay.
Hold there, how is this channel so criminally underrated? That video was amazingly well done. Very interesting.
cus its not dramatic
Some people sucks… It’s an universal law.
That's easy: no "influencers", pranks, cute girls, wads of cash or stupid songs. Just "boring" science.
It was only created in 2019, would be one reason. A second reason may have a little to do with what been coined as the recent awakening (personally this term takes the importance away from its occurrence). Where a percentage of the global population are bringing forth alternative theories for explaining the narrative, that up til now has been documented mostly manifested events (care of the higher education beliefs and thoughts of the scientific community only) to form the world's history.
This video brings forth a lot of simular views to just where this knowledge has arisen from, and if indeed it should or be it could be quantified as truthfulness and/or factual in its entirety. Though I'll save that for some other time. TRUTH OR TRANCE
Because a very large portion of the population is far more concerned about Elon musk being pale on a yacht or what's going on with Elon musk and twitter. And I know that's something that seems like it's an incredibly ignorant statement but it's the truth. So many people don't want to learn anything they just want gossip gossip gossip. Personally I can't handle that shit. I spend almost no time on social media I guess if you were to consider TH-cam social media yes I spend quite a bit of time on here but typically I'm learning things. My search queries are interesting to say the least. This was very well done. Makes me want to watch more on this channel.
Hi there. I am a physicist and I published my doctoral thesis on the Quark-Gluon Plasma created at the LHC at CERN. Great video, but you sort of lose the plot around 13:22 . Firstly, as you yourself point out, the concept of 'relativistic mass' is a contentious one within the community. Einstein's equations (and experimental evidence) shows that *momentum* increases non-linearly with greater and greater speed, p=ymv, where y is the relativistic gamma ( y = 1/root(1-v^2/c^2) ). But the rest mass (E=mc^2) remains the same. So you either have to say that there are multiple types of "mass" ('relativistic mass' and 'rest mass', M=ym)... which is kinda a weird idea if you think about it. Or you can just say that there are multiple 'types' of velocity (V=yv). Both idea work to explain observations, but the second idea is much more popular because the idea of 'relative' velocities is consistent with the rest of Eistein's theory of 'relativity' and the first idea is not.
Secondly, while it's true that the strength of gravity increases as you add kinetic energy to a system, it's a huge leap in logic to say that maybe gravity will become so strong that is creates mini black holes which somehow evaporate and cool the system. Rather, I would say that our current models simply don't predict what will happen if black body radiation becomes on the order of the plank length. We have absolutely zero experimental observations in that regime - it's all 100% speculation. Objects in this temperature regime don't 'break physics' anymore than Kepler's observations of the planets 'broke physics'. Instead, we just don't currently have a model that explains what might happen in this scenario. You kind of say that at the end, but only after you - pardon my harsh language here - wildy speculate about a fringe theory with no evidence. I think you could have just skipped to "I don't know".
And it's okay to say 'I don't know'. Admitting ignorance is the foundation of the scientific method.
The point you make is fair, however ending the video with uncertainty over the matter would certainly would have been less entertaining than the ending he gave albeit speculation.
Just the possibility of what he described actually occurring is more than enough to excite the mind of the uninitiated!
@@AdamAttia007 Yes, I understand the need to entertain, but I think there was a better way to do it. Modern society places a *lot* of faith in science (one might even say too much), and so I think that it's more important than ever for scientists - and even science entertainers - to be very very clear about the limitations of our knowledge. Misconceptions and overstatements can cause a lot of damage, even if they are well intentioned.
i think 'breaking physics' referred to human physics
not nature's physics
&
more importantly
the narrator has, in many vids inc this one, demonstrated that he's not afraid of saying his knowledge is limited
so
he is not one of the many people who needs to be told "it's ok to say you don't know"
...your last comment was therefore irrelevant, at best, or patronising
Idk why but I tried calculating the Planck temperature using the constants and formula shown at 11:30. However when I did so, I got the wrong answer. So I looked it up and it appears that you wrote down the value of the Planck constant (h), while the formula seems to use the reduced Planck constant (ħ), which is equal to around 1.05457×10^-34, or h/2π. Using this value does give the temperature mentioned in the beginning of the video.
Fusing silicon into heavier elements releases less energy than fusing hydrogen into helium. Most of the increase in temperature in the star is due to the star shrinking in size as the fusion process continues. Basically, the star is converting potential energy of matter being farther from the center of the star into kinetic energy, which is expressed as hotter atoms. Initially, the proto-star's core is not hot enough to fuse anything until it contracts and heats. This heating is simply due to the atoms getting closer together and happens all over the earth, although not so dramatically. Once most of the hydrogen is converted to helium, the star contracts and the core warms up until it is hot enough to initiate fusion of helium. This continues until the star turns most of its matter into iron. Stars that are too small don't heat up enough as they contract and eventually stop short of forming either a neutron star or black hole (or more exotic paths of the very large stars). These stars become white, red, or brown dwarfs.
Why then if you stretch out a rubber band then let it contract does the rubber band get cooler?
Too true m8
@@mandelabrein8116 because when you stretch the elastic, it gets hotter than its surroundings. The heat is quickly radiated away to the environment. When you release the elastic, its energy is less than when when it was before. Less energy equals lower temperature.
Well you're failing to consider something - which is that when a star fuses hydrogen into helium, it does it over millions to billions of years. When a star fuses aluminum and silicon into iron, it lasts for about a day. So YES, much less binding energy is available from silicon fusion and much less energy is released per kilogram when it fuses, and yet the power produced is still much more, so you are mistaken in your premise anyway. It's like comparing a tank of gasoline to a stick of dynamite. Yes the dynamite releases less heat than the total from burning the gasoline, and yet you shouldn't be underestimating the dynamite.
Actually the higher temps required are due to the way higher coulomb barriers between the heavier elements, in other words, their kinetic energy has to be much higher to overcome it and have nuclei touch each other to fuse into even heavier elements. In other words, beyong hydrogen-hydrogen fusion, the process starts to hinder itself when it fuses progressively heavier and heavier elements. The input required for larger nuclei increases as the yield decreases. And it so happens that crossover beetween net positive and net negative fusion is at...Iron.
Oh the Irony. Yes, the reason why Neutron stars have an Iron crust.
My big takeaway from this is that our personal notion of "normal" is, relatively speaking, just a whisker away from absolute zero. And yet, there are all sorts of interesting things happening. Like the famous three states of matter (plus I suppose plasma, which is the fourth), all of which don't come into play unless we're in this almost-zero condition. It seems highly unlikely to me that all the interesting stuff would be happening on one end of the spectrum. The video mentions some interesting things that start to happen at the high end as well. So are there similar states that manifest throughout the temperature range? Or is it just boring in the 99.99999999+++ in the middle?
I think, and hope, you are right. Would be kind of narcissistic to think everything interesting must be happening where we can see it. Who knows that kind of tech we could create if weird stuff does start happening? Every new phenomena opens up so many possibilities.
Reminds me of how most of the useful information in music is in the bass, even though the high frequencies are capable of carrying more information.
What you would consider interesting events, are events that occur in stable environments. The issue of temperature and kinetic energy then becomes: what environments allow interesting things to occur? The most stable ones do. So every **sustained** temperature will be in an "interesting" environment. And it's no surprise we find ourselves in the place with the most "interesting" things happening, as we are the most stable environment by definition, as far as we know, as it has produced the most complex things we know of : humans.
What you mean by "interesting" is "complex" and only the most stable environments do not override complexity with some simple metric gone rampant. Like temperature. Too much temperature, does not allow the other forces to produce complex things before the temperature destroys them. Complexity (that considers what is complex to be interesting) must find itself in an environment that does not override any forces too much.
Tidbit: if the universe as a whole manages to stay stable while being hotter, (all forces balance in that environment), then that will be where all the most "interesting" things will happen.
When less of one thing occurs, more of all the others occurs, basically.
@@douggale5962 That's not entirely true if you scale the frequencies logarithmically, which is how our ears perceive them. Octaves are derived from the doubling of frequencies. So 100-200 Hz is the same jump as 10,000-20,000 Hz.
Actually, there are five states of matter...you forgot about gels.
Would love to see a "what if" example if the magnitude of that heat. Like, if there were a sugar cube sized piece of matter at the planck temperature, would that be enough heat that it's dissipation would burn up a city? ocean? globe? Could help give a sense of magnitude.
Yeah that would be an interesting postulation, I'm left wondering if it would lead to another big bang, with the mass and energy required to create a sizable quantity of plank level state "matter" would that be the tipping point for another big bang? Totally guessing based on some of the points raised in the video, no idea the creation of plank state matter is even possible without all the matter in our observable universe.
the big bang was probably at that temperature so that gives you an idea of what would happen
@@Chippie-O not even close
Your question depends on the density of the cube in question. It will have a very different answer if you mean a cube of actual sugar or a cube of matter at the Planck density. Remember, don't confuse temperature with heat! The corona of the sun is millions of degrees hot but you could stand in it just fine because there is very little heat in it.
@@ObjectsInMotion As I was asking that question, I was thinking of density in my head. The matter would be a quark soup no? How dense is that. With the amount of energy in that, is there any constraint that would dictate the density? Or it's simply a function of the mass we decide on? I think someone did a "what if" with a spoon of neutron star before. Is quark plasma more dense than a neutron star?
I am an avid documentary viewer for many years but have never come across anyone explaining such complex topics with such simplistic words. Not only I have subscribed, but also enabled the bell to receive notifications as soon as any video is uploaded and this is the only one which has it for me.
You deserve 10^15 times more subscribers! All killer no filler, clear and understandable, great visuals, and the audio quality is spot on! I’ve only just discovered this channel and I’m so happy!
10 to the 15th power times more? Really? So 1.05 times 10 to the 19th power total then? He should have over a billion subscribers for every human on Earth?
@@medexamtoolsdotcom well done for taking a jokey positive comment on a video regard ludicrous scales in exactly the manner it was intended. 🥳👍
He deserves Plank number of subscribers. That should be way more than 10^15, not enough mass for them to collapse into a black hole. Should be about 10^28.
@@medexamtoolsdotcomwoah you really don’t realize that was just a joke?
@@emsa5034 woah u really didn’t realize he was joking to?
This is one very, very interesting concept to say the least. Great job explaining it all
Thank you very much. I'm glad you enjoyed the video.
Another thing to consider is the velocity of the hot particles themselves. As they increase velocity with an increase in temperature, then there must be an ultimate temperature at which the particles are moving at the speed of light.
But nothing with mass can get to the speed of light.
12:36 Jumpscare 😵I was not prepared for this in a science video 😄 But really great video! Thank you for publishing!
Planck Time: the smallest unit of time where anything can be said to meaningfully happen, the "frame rate" of the universe
Planck Distance: the smallest unit of distance where something can be said to have moved to a different position, the "resolution" of the universe
Planck Temperature: ...not a unit, but the top end of the temperature scale, as far from absolute zero as the laws of physics allow
...seems legit.
sounds like a gaming setup
We live in a simulation!
Apparently it just relates to Planck distance which is why they called it Planck temperature.
Due to the way temperature is described, something at "max temperature" emits light with wavelengths only at 1 Planck Distance, so the lowering of one Planck Temperature unit would be to increase at least one light particle emitted to 2 Planck Lengths, the smallest unit of temperature that we can decrease from a heat source.
@@iCarus_A So really you could say it is about the Planck frequency of light?
@@iCarus_A I wonder if blackbody radiation would be the only thing that really breaks at the planck temperature. I could imagine that the photons are emitted at 1 planck length, but just.. more of them as you get hotter.
The only true limit to temperature I can imagine, and I may be mistaken for assuming this is higher than the planck temperature described, would be the point where the speed of each particle is the speed of light.
Nice explanation, staying within pretty solid knowledge, steered clear of smart-assery and uses simple effective visuals - well done
Thank you very much. I try to do my best and make factual entertaining content
@@LearningCurveScience Just to give my opinion: I did not like it because you talk for 10 mins about some other stuff before going to what the title promised: "planck temperature" and talk about it for 4mins. so i think you should consider changing the title of the video.
@@srmeister1 he gave perspective on the temperate
@@srmeister1 Well the average person needs some kind of prospective first before jumping straight into this kind of topic, not everyone is a quantum physicist like you.
Excellent post. You have the ability to explain the complexity of the universe in understandable words. I will look for more of your posts.
This is my now favourite channel, brilliantly explained.
Wow! He explains everything in a way that's so easy to digest and understand but not so stupidly oversimplified that you lose the point. Congrats on that alone! Also, the video is really well put together, so amazing job on that as well. I'm definitely checking out your channel after I finish this video.
Sin leads to hell, keep focused, the devil is on earth to destroy your soul. But God wants to give you everlasting Joy. But our sin is keeping this from happening. You must stop sinning and turn to Jesus Christ he is your only hope.
He can save you from eternal suffering under the Earth, where hell is hot..
Not everyone who calls me their Lord will get into the kingdom of heaven. Only the ones who obey my Father in heaven will get in.
Matthew 7:21
Brilliant, so well explained and fascinating, and I now understand things I never thought I would ever understand!
I’m shocked you don’t have way more subscribers with these videos! So happy I found your channel. I’m sure major growth and success is soon to come 😊
Great narration and editing, watched from start to finish without skips!
jumped at 5:46 from the weirdly hyper-realistic lightning strike
LMAO I was searching for this comment. Scared the crap outta me😂
Apologies, I didn't mean to scare anyone.
@@LearningCurveScience It's fine lol, at least I had a good chuckle out of me getting spooked by an unexpected attention grabber😆
@@LearningCurveScience btw I like your in-depth dives into these topics! Keep up the great work!
Scared the shit out of me too!
Magnificent what a brilliant communicator!! Only a matter of time before this channel starts accumulating millions of views. Thoroughly enjoyed that top job
Fun fact, at one point the coldest place in the universe was in a lab in Espoo, finland. Pretty weirdly out of place location for a record like that at the time.
I know this is a serious topic, but kudos to astronauts with thermometers for measuring those temperatures. Appreciate hard work and dedication.
What's mind boggling, is the amount of energy needed to create that level of heat.
Sickness
I think it would be near infinite energy, as particles with mass get closer and closer to the speed of light, the amount of energy required to accelerate it approaches infinity since the mass approaches infinity. At least that’s as much as I understand
Perhaps a Big Bang’s worth?
Not necessarily. If you had a small enough sample of it, it wouldn't need to be that much energy. We're talking about 1 planck energy (3 gigajoules) average energy per particle collision. So you know we're still talking about a substance where every particle collision has the energy of a stick of dynamite but that's hardly a universal scale quantity of energy.
But you know, you don't typically see things like 2 protons hit each other with 3 gigajoules of energy, or a single photon with 3 gigajoules of energy, so you would definitely not want to be near a large quantity of anything at anything near the planck temperature.
Please, please make more of this kind of content! The universe is so fascinating at its extremes, whether in the extremes of temperature, speed, space or size. Your video is well produced, engaging and easy to follow.
Sin leads to hell, keep focused, the devil is on earth to destroy your soul. But God wants to give you everlasting Joy. But our sin is keeping this from happening. You must stop sinning and turn to Jesus Christ he is your only hope.
He can save you from eternal suffering under the Earth, where hell is hot..
Not everyone who calls me their Lord will get into the kingdom of heaven. Only the ones who obey my Father in heaven will get in.
Matthew 7:21
I love your video! They are so easy to understand, everything make senses and it's really entertaining, I learned a lot! Thank you very much
The “Absolute Zero Tea” that you describe is just what happens to my Dad’s typical cup of tea after he leaves half of it unconsumed. Then he’ll come back to it 12 hours later and still deem it safe to drink.
Very interesting and well done, I loved it!
Thank you.
Finally an answer to the question my mate and I asked our physics teacher over 30 years ago!
Is there an absolute maximum temperature?
It's an interesting possibility, but I'm not sure the video really proved that such a temperature is the maximum possible. Rather, the theory within places an upper limit on the energy of individual photons. I see no reason to think that the temperature of matter should be thus limited, just (maybe) the rate at which it cools itself by emitting photons.
As you add energy to a particle to increase its speed, and as it approaches the speed of light, the rate at which you add more (relativistic) mass overtakes the rate at which you add speed -- since no massive particle can move at the speed of light (from your reference frame). So, I don't see the speed of light placing any limit on temperature, either.
I would be curious to see the effect of frame dragging on "relativistically hot" substances.
For that matter, as I understand it, it is incorrect to think of planck length as the smallest possible distance. Rather, it's the smallest, theoretically measurable distance. Imagine a photon with planck length wavelength... now blueshift it by moving toward it. This increases its energy, because you can't make it move any slower.
Awesome video and very interesting,
You know I have never thought of the hottest or coldest temperatures till now.
Keep up the good work.
He said that at absolute zero the molecule still vibrate. They're not vibrating, they're shivering. They're saying, "Is it just me, or is it cold out there?" LOL
At 13:06 there is a bit of confusion about relativistic mass. Short summary: only the rest mass contributes to gravity, the “extra” mass of an object with high velocity has to do with its momentum- specifically the difficulty in changing its momentum. This video points out the misconception: th-cam.com/video/LTJauaefTZM/w-d-xo.html
The relativistic pool game (starting at around nine minutes) in Episode 44 of The Mechanical Universe goes into the exact details of “relativistic mass (momentum)” actually being due to the velocities of the observers. th-cam.com/video/lZUrLq0LLIU/w-d-xo.html
Thanks for the info. I'm not specifically a physicist, but I'll watch the video. I'm just doing my research for Planck mass and whilst I can't promise I won't make any mistakes I'll do my best to keep it accurate and entertaining.
@@LearningCurveScience There's also this: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_in_special_relativity
With all the "red horror heat warnings" we have been getting here in the UK this summer, one would think that the Planck Temperature had been reached in the sunlight...
Lmao so true😂😂😂
You need to stop reading the Daily Express. Next week it’ll be a white horror whiteout.
The real problem is that you guys can't seem to buy a good AC unit, tho I'm not sure the reason for that.
Over here in the US I can go to the hardware store, spend maybe $150 USD, and come out of the store with an air conditioner unit that I can mount in a window that doesn't even need a 15A 125v circuit to run. That's a 9000 BTU unit by the way, which is more than capable of keeping at least a few rooms plenty cool.
I don't think you can do that over in the UK. Affordable access to cooling technologies is basically impossible over there I've heard. I'm not sure why that's the case, but that's the problem.
@@44R0Ndin Also, our homes are designed to retain heat, not let it go.
@@horntail-wyvern2803 That doesn't matter nearly as much as you think it does. Insulation works both ways, and there's workarounds to reduce the effectiveness of house features intended to capture solar heat passively during the day.
About the insulation, I have a few examples. Your fridge is insulated so it doesn't have to constantly be running the motor to keep your food cold (likely using a ~2.5-5cm layer of styrofoam, more is better from an efficiency standpoint), and your furnace or boiler, and water heater are also insulated so they don't burn your house down (likely with a cm or 2 of rock wool, fiberglass, or other high-temperature tolerant insulation, efficiency matters less here but there is still a balance to be struck).
Another example, and I've adapted it to UK tastes. A thermos flask will keep tea hot just as well as it will keep some other beverage cold (for US people like myself I'd say coffee, naturally).
Now on to the features of a house that may be designed to capture heat from the sun, and you don't want them to do that right now:
If you have windows that face the sun most of the day and you don't want the sun's heat coming in the house that way, the solution is to put shutters or shades on them, on the OUTSIDE of the house, because the shutters or shades will also get heated and if they're inside that still ends up heating the house, but if they're outside that just heats the outside and who really cares.
Also, in case you don't remember, something very similar to this happened either last year or the year before, so either the UK and the rest of Europe is going to have to invest in air conditioning systems and the power grid upgrades that come with that (and before you say it, I'm speaking geographically here, and in that way the UK is still very much a part of Europe, Brexit or not), or well I'm not really sure what other option there is to stay cool other than perhaps vests filled with cold packs that you put in the freezer overnight (those are indeed a thing, tho again they're strangely hard to find in UK amazon but they're within the first 10 results on US amazon).
... side note, if you do cosplay and the character you cosplay has a particularly warm costume, those vests can really come in handy. Same solution also works if you wear a fursuit at a convention, in both cases it can be very effective at preventing heat exhaustion and/or heatstroke.
I don't know it from personal experience mind you, I may be a furry but I don't have a suit... yet (expensive enough where I'd need a plan for how to get it, and my engineering-aligned mind desperately wants a solution to the heat problem before I even consider saving up for one, my first idea was to adapt the idea NASA uses to keep astronauts in space suits cool (liquid cooling garment) but the vest full of cold packs is an off-the-shelf solution that is a perfectly good enough passive solution at least until the cold packs fully melt, which seems like a superior solution in that it's just a lot simpler with less to go wrong).
Now I'm more understanding of the Planks Temperature. FANTASTIC things I'm. learning on TH-cam. Unbelievable library of available knowledge
Really interesting video. I always wondered if there is a maximum temperature, how high it would be and why it would be that high.
Thank you for answering all my questions on this 😃
That was an absolutely brilliant video. I am so impressed with how these were explained so that a typical guy like me could really understand this.
Particles can't move faster than light so it seems that that would also have implications for the maximum temperature. The particles can only vibrate so fast.
Sure they can! Neutrinos in OPERA have been found to move 1.000002 times faster than the speed of light.
@@reyanshagrawal2613confirmed false
Thanks to you, I finally understand the "E = mc^2" formula correctly! You give such easy-to-understand videos!
I mean this in the most positive possible way, the way you enunciate certain worlds at pauses in sentences is strange to my ears but very pleasant to listen to. I think it keeps my brain 'tuned in' by being thrown off in the way you work your way through the script being a little 'off' to me
Thanks for blowing my mind and being so entertaining while you do it. Your explanations were concise and head-shaking.
By the way. Towards the end of the video you talked about the miniscule black holes evaporating. Do you have a video on that?
This video rivals Vsauce's video "How hot can it get?"
Which I think, is a very good compliment. Well done 👏
I love this - I've learned so much. Thank you!
Another very USEFUL videos that I was dying to discover. I'll sleep so much better tonite now that I have watched such a gem!!!
Man, that was an excellent explanation of how the Plank temperature naturally arises as an upper limit because of the of the lower limit of distance given by the Plank length and blackbody radiation. I don't know if it's accurate or not, but it makes a lot of sense, so it seems right.
The fact that, no matter what, the universe itself will eventually reach absolute zero in its entirety is both tragic and a little terrifying.
the universe itself will never reach absolute zero. It's a limit, it will asymptotically go towards it but never reach it.
Would temperature not just seize to be measurable as particles become unable to interact thus meaning nothing could be recorded?
@@sadfrog1192 there will be nothing able to care about it long before that happens...
Even scarier that the universe might be like that forever after the last black hole evaporates.
completly new concept for me but very well explained. you gained a stable subscriber mate!
Great video, this was really interesting ,,, and even almost scary to think about. Like we can never comprehend these temperatures
if the universe is cooling from heat of the big bang to the 2.7K we know today over 13B years, there could have been a period lasting millions of years where space was a cozy 20 degrees Celsius.
That's amazing to think that space could have been comfortable for living organisms at one point!
Unfortunately you would be floating in a very dark near vacuum with occasional atoms of hydrogen and helium bumping into you, so my guess is that you would freeze to death as you radiate all the heat away and there's not much matter and radiation to warm you up
If you survived the crazy amount of radiations coming with the cozy warm :)
@@calgar42k Just about everything around you currently emits blackbody radiation at around room temperature. i.e. IR frequencies. No scary radiation needed. Things have to get pretty hot to start emitting even UV.
If only my science teacher had been so informative as you! Thanks!
Now there’s a thought.
It's sad that teachers have to deal with classrooms full of disinterested teens xD Kids could learn so much if they were as fascinated with the material as some of their teachers are. (By which I of course don't try to blame kids for being kids. I'm just saying that classrooms aren't always the best pedagogic environment)
Thank you very much. I get stupidly excited about all aspects of science. Proper geek.
Perfect, how the ad popped up the moment he uttered the words "-the universe bre-".
Thats timing
When he started explaining how the wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation decrease with heat and began leading to his point about a planck wavelength, my mind exploded in slow motion, that's insane. Great video.
When he said "I think you know where I'm going with this..." (the shortening of the wavelengths) I was like, holy shit, I actually DO know where you're going with this! Remarkable content discusses eloquently and in a manner understandable by nearly everyone with two brain cells to rub together. Instantly subscribed.
Wow, you made all this science comprehensible - to me! What an achievement, well done. If I was a high school science teacher I'd be showing your videos all the time.
Besides the LHC, I think Tokamak plasmas would have been worth mentioning. While not as hot as particle coliders, they are still hotter than even the core of the sun.
Ph.D. Physicist here: the Planck temperature isn’t so much a maximum temperature in the same sense in which absolute zero is a minimum temperature. That situation occurs in things like magnetic materials, like Ising models, where absolute zero has all spins parallel to a magnetic field and absolute not has exactly half the spins aligned (actually infinite temperature because the derivative of energy with respect to entropy hits 0). If all the spins are pointing opposite to the magnetic field the system is in its highest possible energy state, yet at zero entropy. The concept of temperature goes weird here, in one sense negative temperature because increasing energy decreases entropy, and greater than infinity in another sense, because thermal energy will spontaneously flow from a system of negative/infinite temperature to any system of finite temperature. If this sounds like integer overflow in CS, and that’s in fact similar to some really cute math involved. This is totally ok and normal and well described by 19th century thermodynamics.
Planck temperature isn’t like this at all. It’s a maximum temperature in the sense that above that we don’t know what temperature, energy, or spacetime mean anymore, the concepts themselves break down.
Really enjoyed this explanation. Thank you so much!
Wow this was extremely well done! The fact that you only have 2K subscribers is a crime. Keep going bro!
Thank you very much. To be honest, I don't worry about subscriber numbers, I just enjoy making videos.
@@LearningCurveScience in any case with content of this quality there'll eventually be millions of subscribers, it'll just happen at some point. Thank you for providing such a superb educational resource some.very cool videos here
First minute and I already gotta thank you for including Fahrenheit too! It's nice (and rare) when science videos list temperatures in F at all. Heck, you used all THREE! (Kelvin, Celsius, Fahrenheit). I would've liked this video anyway because this is fascinating stuff, but that's a nice little bonus.
This channel currently has only 1.73k subscribers? Oh THAT'S not right. Have my sub. :)
(is it bad that as soon as you mentioned "a nice hot cup of tea", my brain went straight to the Infinite Improbability Drive? ;))
Thank you very much. Most of my viewers are American so it just seems polite to use units they understand as often as I can, and yes the nice hot cup of tea was absolutely a reference to the infinite improbability drive!
Technically there's also this french one that I can't pronounce, the symbol is an R.
Kelvin and Celsius are the same scale just with a different Zero Point.
@@dorderre I know there is a Rankine scale. Based on the Fahrenheit scale, with 0 Rankine being absolute zero, which is around -459 degrees Fahrenheit.
@@cfltheman He was talking about the Réaumur scale ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%A9aumur_scale ) but Rankine was definitely worth mentioning too :)
@@tinu5779 I never was taught that in school. Honestly I was never taught the Rankine scale either.
Thanks. Much love!
Thank you. Nicely explained
I love how thought engaging physics can be. I would have loved a career in it, but I stopped enjoying math at calculus, lmao. The theory of radiation waves and the planck length was creative.
i went to study physics but i couldnt get over all the math. at some point we actually had more math courses than physics courses.
@@guguigugu I swear, I haven’t taken a non math course that’s related to engineering since high school.
So here's a thought that comes to mind. Based on the examples given of 100 seconds after the Big Bang and the ambient temperature of space, this implies that a given amount of energy was concentrated into a given infinitesimally small volume at the moment of the Big Bang. How close is the estimate of that energy to Planck Temperature?
Assuming it's lower than Planck Temperature, then given this concentration of energy would represent all (or almost all) of the energy available in the universe as a whole, that puts a separate practical upper limit on the highest possible temperature that could ever be achieved within the confines of this universe.
It is my pet hypothesis that time asymptotically approaches the moment of the big bang but, due to the density of energy, never reaches it. Spacetime can bend, so I'm not sure this is an absurd statement.
Either way, space was probably infinite in size, both then and now, it's just... a bigger infinite, now, and that spreading out is what has cooled the background radiation over time. Well, that and being absorbed by matter. Go back far enough and you reach "infinite" energy density. That's the idea, anyway. That's why I don't think of the big bang as an actual event that literally occurred within linear time, but rather as a point on some axis that is never intersected by spacetime.
The singularity that created the Big Bang was infinitely not, and also likely not even from this universe to begin with (0+0=0 in a closed system, doesn’t matter what you do, nothing can ever change that).
That lightning at 5:53 scared the HELL out of me.
Thanks so much, very clear, concise and educational!
I actually thought the laws of physics themselves would break down at much lower temperatures than Planck's temperature. Though if you think about it, they kind of have to break down at that high of a temperature in order for the singularity that became the big bang to have even existed at all.
physics start to break down when you unbind matter in to it's subatomic components.
I love how seamlessly he mixes facts, with conjecture, with pure fantasy, without skipping a beat.
What do you mean?
@@ikariameriks simple. Has planck temperature, time, or space been measured?
Just found this channel, and only a couple of minutes in I thought you were going to do a "Douglas Adams" (Hitchhikers Guide) when referencing the tea. You resisted the temptation!
Other than that, fascinating to see all of this information together in one easy to watch piece. I'm also no physicist but did enjoy the mental gymnastics involved in what you were describing.
I really enjoy listening to you talk. I subscribed, please, keep doing what you do!
That was very interesting and clearly explained. Thanks! One sun gained.
I meant to say ‘sub’, but it auto-corrected to ‘sun’, appropriately enough 🌞
Auto-correct knows!! Thanks for the sub.
Wait, I thought things could not actually get colder than the Cosmic Microwave Background since they'd constantly be "warmed" up by it...
Could someone explain that to me? Genuinely interested
That is an excellent question, and one that I sadly don't know the answer to. This calls for some research I think.
IIUC the CMB is more akin to the air temperature outside on a cod winter night compared to your warm house. If you turned off the heat and all electricity, your house would eventually cool to the air temperature, but not colder.. Without AC, it wouldn't get any cooler than this since your house and the air would reach "steady state" where they're both receiving and emitting the same amount of IR radiation.
To get it colder requires energy to move the excess heat somewhere else.
The same is true for anything far away from something hot (like the sun, or a planet, etc). If you took a brick, and stuck it in interstellar space, it'll cool down to the CMB temperature where that object is the same temperature as the microwaves from the big bang that hit it.
Thank you very much, very well explained a topic which i forgot every time, absolute subscribed to your channel!
Really grateful for my AP Physics teacher allowing me to understand this and giving context to it all
At that temperature, does it even matter if you use °C, °F or K?
Above a million, °C and K are basically the same. °F is more or less twice as big as °C and K.
Well it matters whether you use Fahrenheit or Rankine vs Kelvin or Celcius because being off by 32 or 273 or 459 degrees doesn't matter, but being off by a factor of 1.8 could be important.
On a qualitative level, it makes sense to expect an upper limit to temperature. Since kinetic energy can be expressed as E= 1/2 mv^2 in relation to velocity, and E= 3/2 KT in relation to temperature, you get that 1/2 mv^2 = 3/2 KT. But v cannot be higher than c, from which you expect a limit to T.
"Yea, what he said."
The formula for kinetic energy isn't 1/2mv^2 in relativity though.
@@Motown222 not exactly. He was referring to different constants, like Planck’s
@@Nukestarmaster Sure, as you have to consider Lorentz factor. But that’s the idea
@@ascaniosobrero Thing is, in relativity, kinetic energy actually can keep going up forever, even if velocity can't. Kinetic energy asymptotically approaches infinity as velocity approaches c. This is one of the major reasons the speed of light is so inaccessible in the first place, it'd take an infinite amount of energy to actually reach it.
Damn friend, that was a really well told and interesting video. Your voice and way of explaining things are fantastic.
5:40 The sound of both lightning strikes is properly delayed based on distance. I'm astonished, gotta love the attention to detail!
that's interesting
I know a lot of this is theoretical, but when you say the atoms would still vibrate at absolute zero, for how long?
Vibration requires energy, so eventually those atoms should stop vibrating.
Then what happens?
Read up on zero point energy, I dont understand it quite well enough to explain it
Maybe he is talking about what happens at the quantum level.
Isn't it fascinating how close to the edge of absolute zero life thrives on Earth and what a narrow range of temperature it is.
Truly. Things like this should guide life's journeys. But...they don't. Something we need to always remember, as well.
Great comment!
Thank you for this great explanation!
Basically at plank temperature, matter move as fast as speed of light, so if we add more energy, it become a black hole since nothing can go faster than speed of light.
Blackbody radiation is not "a wavelength". It is a distributed spectrum of a well-defined bell-like shape, the shape's peak wavelength is of course scaling with 1/ temperature. (Total radiated power is scaling by T to the power of 4). Even a 1K cold atom will radiate at planck wavelength, although the intensity at that wavelength is unbelievably low, practically zero. So how to exactly define a "temperature where the laws of physics break"?
@Thomas Lechner - Wrong conclusion, totally wrong! The blackbody DISTRIBUTION curve you refer to is an _emergent property_ from large collections of particles, and does not at all apply to single atoms. Indeed, the entire blackbody concept is an idealization of continuum radiation that only properly applies to totally closed systems in perfect equilibrium (no heat leakage and infinitely old), AND it is contradicted by Quantum Mechanics where only certain energy levels are allowed... the very opposite of a continuum.
@@YodaWhat Indeed. It's what turned around 19th century physics, when quantum physics emerged out of the blue, as classical physics could not answer the riddle of the UV catastrophe.
While most plank forces are absolutes I cant get rid of the feeling something is off. Thing is Plank Mass is not even close to be extremely low or high, its in ball park of a grain of sand. Would love to see an episode on the matter.
Pun intended, at the end?
I'm just working on one at the moment.
If you think that's weird, check out the Planck impedance (electrical resistance). As I recall, it's about 60 ohms. I can hardly think of a more mundane and boring value for it to have. It's like some sort of cosmic joke.
The definition of plank temperature in regards to plank length, made so much sense.
Thank you so much for this geeky content. I need to consume more.
Great video! So, would the particles also move at the speed of light at the max temperature?
Matter only exists below light speed. At speed c mass is infinite so unless the particle becomes infinetly heavy and massive then no.
That also begs the question, could a particle at the plank temperature be moved? Or would it become a universal anchor, since it’s already vibrating at the speed of light and therefore there is no more available speed to move it?
11:30 "h" is the planck constant, whereas you've shown "h bar" (an h with a bar through it), which is the *reduced planck constant*: h over 2pi, or roughly 1.055 x 10^-34
Also: the units are wrong. They are m^2.kg.s^-1 (rather than m^2.kg^-1.s^-1). Otherwise the units of the Planck Temperature come out as K.kg^-1, which is clearly wrong.
This is fantastic, well done.
This is great because I remember being in physics and asking this question! I think I used this exact wording. The teacher didn't know know, but now I can learn, thanks!
I had wondered what the opposite of absolute zero was, Absolute zeros is when there is matter but no energy, so I thought there most be a temperature where there is no matter, which I think is the quark-gluon plasma. Thanks for explaining sort of what I thought.
Opposite of absolute zero is negative absolute zero. In thermodynamics scale, any negative temperature is hotter than any positive temperature, where negative absolute zero is hottest.
h = 6.6261×10^-34
h bar = 1.0545×10^-34
The metric units of Planck's constant are ( kg^1 , s^-1 , m^2. )
kg^1?!
Also, there's a typo in the speed of light.
This video is awesome, I've never heard someone explain Zero Point Energy and the Bose Einstein Condensate so comprehensibly!
At 5:39 nice details that the far lightning have delay and the closer one does not