Is 2 degrees fahrenheit...

3% is 50% greater than 2%.

And I liked my yardstick example; I think it's easier than standing on chairs or whatever.
 
If I am 5'10", and my friend is 5'6", then I am taller. If my friend stands on a foot high box, now who is taller?
Spoiler :
Remember, taller and higher mean two different things.
 
Enough of this simplicity - someone tell me what the temperature was at the center of mass during the opening moment of the Big Bang... inquiring minds want to know.
 
Lotus49, It's in the Bible, look it up, sheesh

1.417 x 10^32 degrees C/K... 5.391 x 10^-44 seconds after the Big Bang just isn't good enough. I want to know what the 'absolute maximum' temperature was at the very instant of creation. Unlimited? Inexplicable? Here we are in this darn numerical Pi-type situation again. Science "just can't say". Blast!
 
1.417 x 10^32 degrees C/K... 5.391 x 10^-44 seconds after the Big Bang just isn't good enough. I want to know what the 'absolute maximum' temperature was at the very instant of creation. Unlimited? Inexplicable? Here we are in this darn numerical Pi-type situation again. Science "just can't say". Blast!

Nobody knows whether Big Bang = creation. It actually likely wasn't.
 
Nobody knows whether Big Bang = creation. It actually likely wasn't.

Alright then, well at least tell me whether or not all the growing/strengthening dark energy is going to ultimately validate the Big Rip hypothesis.

*cough* and if so, what will the temperature then be when it's all lights out, and there's no more atoms/particles (matter/dark matter/antimatter etc.) at all anymore to maintain zero degrees Kelvin?
 
No, the difference between .1 and .2 is .1, not 10, units. When you multiply integers by a constant, u have a logrithmic scale.
Decibels are indeed a logarithmic scale, with each full 'bell' being 10x the intensity of the previous one. So, 20 decibels is 10x the intensity of 10 decibels. The intensities of the deci- parts are all arranged on a nice logarithmic curve.
 
My Eyes!! My Eyes!!

I Can't Bear To See All Those Confusing Things!!

Let Me Repeat My Mantra!!

Celsius!! Celsius!!

Killometers! Killometers!

Kilograms! Kilograms!

Meters! Meters! Oh God, Meters!

Take Those Miles And Fahrenightars Away!!
 
Alright then, well at least tell me whether or not all the growing/strengthening dark energy is going to ultimately validate the Big Rip hypothesis.

*spins a wheel*

hmm check Revelations?

*cough* and if so, what will the temperature then be when it's all lights out, and there's no more atoms/particles (matter/dark matter/antimatter etc.) at all anymore to maintain zero degrees Kelvin?

Well.. 0 degrees K doesn't have to be maintained. If there was no energy in the Universe at all, the temperature would fluctuate at around 0 K (fluctuate due to quantum effects, it would never be a static 0).
 
Alright then, well at least tell me whether or not all the growing/strengthening dark energy is going to ultimately validate the Big Rip hypothesis.

*cough* and if so, what will the temperature then be when it's all lights out, and there's no more atoms/particles (matter/dark matter/antimatter etc.) at all anymore to maintain zero degrees Kelvin?

If we assume the universe will continously expand as current hypothesis suggests, the universe will dissolve into a pile of leptons and photons whose thermal energy will approach absolute zero.

Depending on the scale used. Although 233 kelvins is equal to -40 C. So looks like we were both wrong, lousy math skills . . .

Aha! Not so fast. 233 Kelvin would be slightly cooler (0.15) degrees cooler than -40C ;)

Rankine's getting no lovin' in this thread:(

That's because his scale supports an extremely difficult to use, and effectively obsolete system of measurement.
 
I guess we'd have to ask the Canadians and the Alaskans. I'm sure they'll both say that "-40 is not really all that cold"

I'm here to tell you - unless we're talking about wind chill or some pretend temperature like that, -40 is really frikkin cold. :snowcool:
 
Sure, decimals are logarithmic, and .005 is 2x, or 3x, or 10x?, of .004

All those straight linear numbers (based upon the number 10) on a logarithmic curve... Wait, curve?

Stop it. Raw integers used to represent a measurement, and NOT multiplied by a constant, are linear.

Linear. Divided into equal portions. Just because 2 is 200% of 1, does not mean 10 is 200% of 9. Nor is .8 200% of .7

Just because you can find particular marginal values in a scale that relate at a particular ratio is no indication that the ratio is constant throughout the scale - grrrr.

Don't make me post defs of linear and logarithmic scales.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logarithmic_scale
 
I round once, and everyone complains . . .

You gotta be careful with that stuff. Out on the praries, 0.15 degrees can mean the difference between cold and indetectably colder :p

In the first world, we call it .35F cooler. :mischief:

And I'm sure your friends in Liberia and Bangladesh just love you for it ;)

But Temperature is very much a linear scale. The amount of energy between any two degrees is the same, all things held equal. Specific heat capacity does not change unless you adress a state change. The amount of energy required to raise 1g of room temperature air from 273.15K to 274.15K is the same energy required to raise the temperature of 1g of air from 303.15K to 304.15K. It's about 1J, and so long as the air doesn't change phase, that won't change.
 
Back
Top Bottom