- Dec 27, 2001
- 2,552
- 0
- 76
Why do scientists use Kelvin (I know 0 K is absoluate zero) instead of Celcius? Are their advantages to use Kelvin in calculating than Celcius?
Originally posted by: josphII
because certain formulas would break down if you had an object at 273 Kelvin and used celcius instead because youd be multiplying or dividing by 0
Originally posted by: NogginBoink
Originally posted by: josphII
because certain formulas would break down if you had an object at 273 Kelvin and used celcius instead because youd be multiplying or dividing by 0
Multiplying by zero is a perfectly valid operation.
And who the heck divides by temperature?
Originally posted by: NogginBoink
Originally posted by: josphII
because certain formulas would break down if you had an object at 273 Kelvin and used celcius instead because youd be multiplying or dividing by 0
Multiplying by zero is a perfectly valid operation.
And who the heck divides by temperature?
Originally posted by: Haircut
200K is exactly double 100K, 200C is not double 100C
Working in Kelvin makes it so much easier if you are using formulae that have temperature as a variable because of the above reason.
Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis
Is it that hard to figure out? When something is 200K, it is literally twice as hot as something that is 100k. Something that is 2C is not twice as hot as something that is 1C. It's about 0.3% hotter... Hence the better utility for math. Even I know that and I'm a liberal arts student!
There isn't such a thing as 'absolute heat', basically temperature is a way of measuring how much energy particles have. The faster they move, the more energy they have and so the higher the temperature.Originally posted by: Staples
Well then what is the opposite of absolute zero in Kelvin? They say that an atomic bomb gets so hot at its core during explosion that things close buy just get discinigrated (sp). And what is it called? Absolute heat?
