Diferent kind of energy (heat and kinetic)

[AlexB2010]

That's an interesting question, and an active area of research: how does macroscopic behavior arise from microscopic considerations (mesoscopic physics).

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en...=onepage&q=mesoscopic physics thermal&f=false

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v427/n6976/abs/nature02276.html

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/search?session_query_ref=rbs.queryref_1276787372488&COLLECTIONS=hw1&JC=sci&FULLTEXT=%28mesoscopic+AND+physics+AND+thermal+AND+quantum+AND+dots%29&FULLTEXTFIELD=lemcontent&TITLEABSTRACTFIELD=lemhwcomptitleabs&RESOURCETYPE=HWCIT&ABSTRACTFIELD=lemhwcompabstract&TITLEFIELD=lemhwcomptitle[/URL][/QUOTE]

If I understand right the links that you post, when you individualize in terms of a single atom, a coherence/decoherence due to clash between quantum and classic mechanics will arise. Some people suppose that some coherent behavior of solids will arise from decoherent interaction between the various molecules.
Don’t having full access to scientific papers that comprise of public knowledge in the internet is paradoxical. In Science fast is better, scientific journal are slow expensive and restrictive. Scientific journals are a barrier to science, people needs to publish their results direct on internet. (just a small off topic, because I can't read the full articles without going to library).
Very Nice to know the field of mesoscopic physics. Looks like a very promising approach to experimental physics.

Alex

 

[Andrew Mason]

Updating the thought experiment.
Instead of using an iron ball and give kinetic energy and thermal energy, and leave then in cold space.
What happens if the subject is a single iron atom?
If I give heat to a single iron atom what happens? They can’t have internal molecular movement.

Alex

In classical physics, temperature is a macroscopic property. It requires a large number of particles whose distribution of kinetic energies follow a Maxwell-Boltzmann curve. You do not have that if you have only one atom. So, in classical physics, the temperature of an atom has no meaning.

AM

 

[|<ings]

this has probably been said already:

Heat flows from objects of higher temperature to objects of lower temperature until both (or all if there are more than two objects) are at the same temperature (i.e. thermal equilibrium). If the space around the ball is colder (at a lower temperature) than the ball, then heat will flow or radiate out of the ball and into that space. Note that the heat gained by the space is equal to the heat lost from the ball, so in terms of the ball-space system (if it is isolated), no heat will be lost.

 

[Count Iblis]

There is no problem in defining a temperature, but there is an issue with getting the usual laws of thermodynamics. For a system with only a few degrees of freedom, you would need to consider the so-called canonical ensemble. Here one imagines that the system is in contact with a heat bath at some temperature T. Considering the system to be isolated (i.e. describing it according to the microcanonical ensemble) won't yield the usual thermodynamical equations. For systems with a large number of degrees of freedom, the two ensembles are equivalent.


You can see this issue very clearly in this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics#Proof_of_for_reversible_processes"

You see that in the microcanonical case, you only get the equation dS = dQ/T if you ignore a term that scales as the inverse system size. So, the relation only holds in the thermodynamic limit.

In the derivation for the canonical ensemble, no such terms are generated, so the relation holds in general.

 

[Andy Resnick]

If I understand right the links that you post, when you individualize in terms of a single atom, a coherence/decoherence due to clash between quantum and classic mechanics will arise. Some people suppose that some coherent behavior of solids will arise from decoherent interaction between the various molecules.

That's how I understand it. There's too many cool experiments to keep track of! :)

 

[Andy Resnick]

In classical physics, temperature is a macroscopic property. It requires a large number of particles whose distribution of kinetic energies follow a Maxwell-Boltzmann curve. You do not have that if you have only one atom. So, in classical physics, the temperature of an atom has no meaning.

AM

That's true, but ultimately limiting. For example, we can put a single atom in a cavity and let it interact with the radiation field. What are the thermodynamics of the system? There's experiments using Rydberg atoms and resonant microcavities being done, and the best I can understand is that "strange things happen".

http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/22/18/32/PDF/ajp-jphyscol198243C221.pdf

Ugh... this was 1982? I am so far behind...

 

[AlexB2010]

That's true, but ultimately limiting. For example, we can put a single atom in a cavity and let it interact with the radiation field. What are the thermodynamics of the system? There's experiments using Rydberg atoms and resonant microcavities being done, and the best I can understand is that "strange things happen".

http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/22/18/32/PDF/ajp-jphyscol198243C221.pdf

Ugh... this was 1982? I am so far behind...

On 82’s Fabre paper they use a group of 100 molecules. I find some recent data showing that using a single organic molecule and given heat to then you will generate electrical current. That’s can show thermal energy given to a single molecule will excite the electron field.
http://www.lbl.gov/msd/assets/docs/highlights/07_5Segalman_thermoelectrics.pdf

What appears in absence of contact of other molecules only the electrical field will increase energy and molecular motion will not happen?
If you think in macro phenomena as a result of non deterministic quantum interactions, looks like each single interaction will be contributing to a mean result and the quantum indeterminism will be seen only on the precision limit of measures.