Fun with Newton's 1st Law and discrepencies within it.

[Tristan Lall]

Originally Posted by Elgin Clock

The other day in my Chemistry class, we were discussing atoms and how they are seen, and looked at through a microscope. The only way to see them is to slow them down enough to be able to see with the naked eye.
This is done by taking them to a temperature which is approximately Zero Degrees C.

However, it was stated in the class Zero Degrees C can not ever be reached. So instead of stopping an atom, they slow it down enough to be able to capture it in the field of view on the microscope.

I think you mean absolute zero, or 0 K = -273.15°C. (Thermodynamically, it's possible to define a negative temperature, but it's not colder than absolute zero—it's a different mess entirely.)

Also, Evan's comments are on track: Newtonian mechanics is intended to work at the macroscopic level, at speeds well under the speed of light. Under those conditions, Newton's laws yield so good an approximation that it's essentially indistinguishable from the results predicted by quantum mechanics or special relativity.

Originally Posted by Elgin Clock

Also, in the whole conservation of energy theory, IF one atom ever was able to stop completely, would we would need something to move to take it's place to make perfect balance to the system??

The act of stopping the atom (because it can't spontaneously stop) transfers its energy to something else, ensuring that energy is conserved. That something else might be its surroundings, if it's being cooled, or might be another body, if it is colliding. In either case, what was formerly the kinetic energy of the atom is being converted to some other form (which isn't necessarily kinetic).