Fun fact, -40C and -40F are the same temperature.
Then 575K and 575F are the same.
Also -40C / -40F and 575K / 575F is the temperature of the center and edges of a hot pocket.
I hate to be the good time ruiner, but unlike -40, it’s not on the nose.
Still, really cool that it’s as close a conversion as it is.
It’s a system of linear equations that has an intersection point. It may not be exactly at 575, but they do intersect. Solving the equation gives 574.589, depending on how many decimal points you round to. So 575 is accurate enough within integer rounding.
So you’re saying, that we should switch to specifying every temperature as a nice 69 and just switch out the unit?
deleted by creator
A pretty cold one, too
It’s not a real sauna if it’s less than 80 °C
Depends if it’s a steam sauna.
but 69 F is nice
21F is just jacket weather.
Only if it’s windy and cloudy. A calm sunny day at 21f is fine for walking around in shirtsleeves.
Depends on how acclimated you are. Right now, for me, I’d be freezing, but if you caught me when I lived in North Dakota, sure.
Yeah North Dakota was nuts. Once it finally hit 40° F in May, people started wearing t-shirts.
Basketball shorts and hoodie is appropriate no matter the season.
21F…someone grew up near the equator
I mean it is literally below freezing so even if you’re the tough kid wearing shorts in the winter the above depiction is not inaccurate.
Yeah, but the other two cold ones are unsurvivable weather. 21F is very survivable.
I didn’t see that SpongeBob ep but if it was the ocean it wouldn’t be frozen at 21 F
21k and 69k are so cold that time would dialate significantly at those temps
This has me confused.
Temperature can be used to refer to how fast the atoms are jiggling (kinetic or phonon temperature) or to how messy, disordered (opposite of ordered) a system is.
Time dilation is a relativistic effect where time appears to go slower when you are looking at something that has a very high speed (near light speed) compared to you (relative velocity). Can also happen with mass because gravity is acceleration, thus related to velocity.
If the atoms are jiggling slower, relative velocities only shrink, so you’d expect to see less relativistic effect. I am not aware of any relativistic effects due to thermal motion in normal conditions (room temp, atmospheric pressure), so I don’t know how they’d appear when relative velocities only decrease.
I am really interested where you got this temperature - time dilation link from. Can’t seem to crack it.
Yeah their comment doesn’t seem right to me. After a bit of googling I found this answer talking about heating things up to see relativistic effects, however because the velocities of the atoms in an object that has been heated up are random it’s most likely not possible to detect any relativistic effects. https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/351773/is-there-a-relation-between-fluctuations-temperature-and-time-dilation
I was taught that any energy exerts stress on space-time and because of that removing energy, lowering temperture, causes dialations.
Where were you taught this? It’s pretty much incorrect.
It is true that particles at higher temperatures have higher kinetic energies. But their velocities are so far away from light speed (usually) that relativistic effects like time dilation are entirely irrelevant.
For reference, the surface of Pluto is about 40K. Some of the other dwarf planets a little further out are in the 21K range. Liquid hydrogen (used in many rockets) is 20K.
69K is slightly warmed than liquid nitrogen (63K), and that is incredibly commonly used all over the world. And warmer than Pluto ;)
College physics course near two decades ago now, only about a quarter semester on reletivity though, it was mostly an extension of the first years physics courses.
It’d be interesting to try to figure out if you were taught wrong, or remember wrong. Memories tend to drift over time, but it’s possible your college did you a disservice and taught you wrong… Not important. Nevertheless, I hope you’re having a great day someplace that is either 21, 69, or 295 ;)
A lot of people definitely taught me wrong, I am American after all. But point taken I was taught the fickleness of memory elsewhere so Im with you there. Could be a bit of both too where I may have heard sometime right and infered something wrong from it. All I remember vividly is heeding my Phys major buddies advice to not stick around for the double pendulum equations.
k is the thousands multiplier. Kelvins are symbolised as K
So twenty thousand kelvins would be 20kK
What, no rankine?
Nice.
