Unlike Google search that a vacuum has no constituent its temperature would be zero, we assume that vacuum has radiation energy density of different colors and different temperatures.
Temperature is both a classical and a quantum concept!
You can have a vacuum quantum system with a certain state and wave function and still have a temperature for that system.
We also believe that this energy density in the vacuum was responsible for the formation and explosion of the Big Bang millions of years ago.
1) Temperature is an ensemble property, individual particles do not have this property. In cluster physics, it was highly debated how many atoms are required in a cluster before you can say it has a temperature. Therefore, vacuum -> no particles -> no ensemble -> no temperature.
2) "Light temperature" is associated to the Planck radiation law and not to be confused with an object's temperature: if a certain mixture of radiation (usually in the visible range) resembles that of a blackbody radiator of a certain temperature, that mixture has this color temperature. However, this cannot be applied randomly, e.g. if you point a laser through vacuum, you cannot simply assign a temperature to the photons inside the vacuum volume. You could go via a "photon gas entropy", but I severely doubt that this is what you have in mind with today's shenanigan.
3) Still, the big bang wasn't an explosion.
quantum mechanics combined with general relativity theory fails to present a complete description of vacuum energy density (we call it vacuum temperature) in space cosmology.
Furthermore, quantum mechanics combined with the theory of general relativity also fails to predict the deterministic future of the macroscopic world as well as its past which is the function of AI via statistical chains of B matrices.
Finally, the Big Bang denied by classical and quantum physics is a fact from the point of view of AI via statistical chains of B matrices [1].
1-Quantum Buzz, vacuum dynamics and Big Bang
RG, IJISRT journal,
July 2024.
The following answer is copied from a physics Q&A site (physics stack exchange).
Although we do not agree 100%, we present it for clarification.
"As the comments pointed out, the vacuum itself has no temperature, since the temperature is defined in terms of the kinetic energy of the particles. However, if you place an object (let's say an idealized black body) inside the vacuum, its temperature is not simply zero. The temperature will actually be related to the relationship between incoming and outgoing radiation. This is the case since electromagnetic radiation can actually travel through a vacuum. In a situation where there is no source appreciable amount of radiation such as a star, and the object is left alone inside the vacuum, its temperature will decrease until it reaches about 3 K, the temperature of cosmic radiation. At this temperature, the object will reach equilibrium.
1) If we place a blackbody radiator in vacuum, there is matter in the region of space, so it is no longer vacuum.
2) The big bang isn't "denied" by quantum mechanics, it's just not an explosion.
The following answer in 2024 is copied from a physics Q&A site (physics stack exchange).
Although we do not agree 100%, we present it for clarification.
“If that was the case, why could it have exploded?
For the same reason that a bomb explodes: the gravitational forces of cohesion are much lower than the kinetic energy of the broken parts. In the case of the Big Bang, the radiation motion of various quantum mechanical entities is much stronger than the attractive gravitational interaction of these entities with respect to each other.
The original explosion is allowed by the mathematics of general relativity, because as noted above, there are many types of singularities in GR. In the current model, contributions from quantum mechanical nature fit and thus explain the observations as they appear in the cosmic microwave background data. »
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Methodology
- Crystallography
- X-ray Diffraction