frozen
that is to say, i know it is at least below them temp that water freezes at. other than that, i do not know.

very very cold

I'm guessing zero degrees. It would be mightly chilly!

I have no idea.

I have no idea. Cool but not so refreshing, I guess.

http://clear.msu.edu:16080/dennie/clipart/chewingg...

My un-educated guess is aroun 40 degrees Farenheit

Just above absolute zero? So about 0.01K (Kelvin) or -272.99 degrees C.....

Just a guess.

Way, way cold. Like minus a couple of hundred below 0ºF or something.

I really don't have a clue, but I'm going to guess it's cold not hot.

I guess it would be the 3 degree Kelvin (270 degrees below zero Celsius) temperature of the cosmic background radiation.

It's neither not nor cold, it's empty space. With no matter about, heat can only transfer by radiation, no conduction. In deep space, the radiation input would be very low (the microwave background radiation is about 3 degrees kelvin) and since radiation output of a body at room temperature is also low, masses would not freeze instantly but would freeze very slowly. Think of being surrounded by the best vacuum thermos ever.

I'm not really sure what you mean by a million miles outside of our galaxy. Remember, it's 93 million miles from the Earth to the sun so if you mean you're only 1 million miles from some star that's on the edge of the galaxy, then the radiation input would be very high and you'd soon very very hot.

Uhhhhh...?
Orange soda?

I'm not sure what the exact temperature is, but I know it's very, very cold. It's not as low as absolute zero, but I imagine it's far below zero Fahrenheit or Celsius.
Or is this some kind of trick question?

I'm not sure that the concept of temperature would even apply in those circumstances. Temperature is a measurement of the relative movement of molecules. You seem to be describing a situation where there wouldn't be any molecules. However, if you were able to make a thermometer materialise in this location (without exploding due to the pressure differential) there wouldn't be any energy to heat it, so it would be cold. Heat is a form of energy. It can be transfered from one source to another, but it can't be created out of nothing. No heat source = no heat. Therefore the theoretical temperature would be absolute zero or very close to it. That would be about -270 °C or -455 °F.

Dab is closest to being correct (and Zang was on the path - until he put a temperature to it, that is). I did ask, with the example, what is 'roughly' the temperature of an empty pocket of space away from galaxies - maybe I should have said with no galaxies in sight. The reason I proposed this quiz is because I came across the interesting fact myself on the Internet.

The answer is that there is no temperature in empty space. Not even zero degrees fahrenheit.

With no radiations to create heat, warmth then is not present. With no chemical reactions to create cold, then it's not cold. And, with the total absence of both, there is no temperature at all. With nothing to measure, I imagine it's tough for the human brain to imagine it. My guess is the thermometer would simply make no movement from the position it had when you brought it to this empty pocket of space...it would be non-reactive.

I haven't read enough on it to be an authority, but I would imagine some extreme examples are if you brought a frozen leg of lamb into this empty space it would never thaw and if you brought a glowing hot peice of metal (provided the energy did not leave the metal), you could always burn your hand by touching it.

Cool.
It is a hard concept to wrap my thoughts around.

0?

"Cool"? No pun, I'm sure. Haha.

The more I think about it, I come to some conclusions of my own (uneducated and premature, I suppose). One conclusion I would imagine is true is that cold is in fact a product of heat. If the universe began with this 'big bang', sending out a brilliant cloud of radiation that first (and finally) generated the resulting trillions of stars, then cold came from the resulting chemical reactions.

Pretty interesting to think we wouldn't have cold if heat didn't exist. Kind of like we wouldn't have any bad if the good didn't exist. To me, it always ends up with balance being the underlying rule to just about everything.

-525 degrees F

-576 Kelvins

0 Kelvin?

The pun. Har-har.

Thich Nat Hahn writes about what you say, he calls it "duality".

Anyhoo, the part that I don't understand is, and this is kinda referring back to Zang's comment as well, is that, isn't air made up of molecules? And if so, if they aren't moving around a lot, isn't it really cold? When I think of "no" temperature, therefore no molecular movement, that sounds like a vacuum/black hole to me.

Okay, so keep in mind, my background/expertise is in textiles, not in...in...what is this? Thermodynamics? Space-time continuum? Atomic theories? Wull. I dunno.

Actually, Zang made the correct reference to molecules until he assumes they would be present in deep space, far away from the reach of any galactic activities. We don't know what makes up space yet. I suppose there isn't much priority placed into the mission of arriving at a formula that results in " =void ".

Myself, I believe empty space is a substance-force combination of some sort. I also believe reaching any part of space so far out there to where no galaxy could be seen would in effect be reaching the edge of the universe. I think the substance would be more force, which would be repelling of mass itself. Though you feel you'd be traveling straight into it, its force is actually having you travel away from it - but only slightly, as if you were blindly trapped in the inside of some dark bubble. This way, we could only circle the universe, never could we 'leave' it.

I have thought all this out for myself (and have never really shared it) because one day my father explained to me that the universe is endless and he went through exercises to have me try to imagine what "endless" means (which the human brain apparently is incapable of perceiving). So, over the years, I've developed this theory that there is in fact an 'edge' to our universe, but that it is just nothing.

cold, 40 degrees F maybe?

If we are nowhere near a sun, then I'd say Absolute Zero. I think that's 0 degrees Kelvin, but I can't remember without a reference.

I know the answer to this one - see what happens when you watch Discovery channel - there is no temperature unoles... well, you do something... I don't know the rest, too science for me.

I was watching Deep Space 1 on Discovery when I got curious to why science hasn't progressed more toward magnetic propulsion than it has. Deep Space 1 discussed how the project tested the ion propulsion technology. That, for some reason, led me to want to understand why Space Lab failed, which led me to this temperature of space thing.

I couldn't live without my daily dosage of Discovery.

My guess is that it would be cold as Dante's Hell! ... No! Colder!!

> I have thought all this out for myself (and have never really shared
> it) because one day my father explained to me that the universe is
> endless and he went through exercises to have me try to imagine what
> "endless" means (which the human brain apparently is incapable of
> perceiving). So, over the years, I've developed this theory that
> there is in fact an 'edge' to our universe, but that it is just nothing.


Have you ever wondered about "nothing"? I mean like; what if nothing that we know (or don't know) of ever existed. That it was never meant to be, beyond chaos... nothing... really nothing? It's as difficult to imagine as infinity... Yet, infinity as nothing must exist - take Pi for instance...

It is impossible for me to understand endless. Everything must end right? Except for a circle that continues forever. But what is outside of the circle? more circles?

Ah, right. I see what you're saying...I was assuming that our air is the galaxy's air. But with our atmosphere, you're right. No can be. So space is devoid of stuff.
Okay, and about your substance/force ratio theory. It's cool that you think about this stuff. I don't really think about what I think space is like. The theory, though, reminds me of an earthly concept I read, I don't know, several years ago. One of Rudolf Steiner's books, Cosmic Memory, talks about, among other things, as an exploration into man's evolution, how water and air, way back when, did not have the same densities as they do now. He states that the air used to be much much denser than now, and water was a lot less dense. This information he derived from the unwritten memory of the earth itself.....The denser air was one of the qualities which allowed our ancestors to travel in vehicles which hovered just slightly over the ground. I digress, but his explanation of 'denser air' helps me understand your theory of 'space air/space void'. It's like, the farther you get from a galaxy, the denser the lack of stuff gets...or is it the denser the stuff gets? I dunno. Anyway, good stuff. Ha, stuff, ha.

Tough huh?

One good thing about my father was that he was incredibly well-read. He gained all that much too late in life because he quit school in third grade - he was a milkman most of the time I was growing up. Once he left my mother, having his girlfriend forge my mother's name to steal a car, and by forging my own signature (I'm a 'junior') and stealing thousands of dollars I had sent home in the form of US savings bonds from Korea when I was in the Air Force, I heard he went home to Philadelphia and became some self-made multi-millionaire...so maybe he finally found a way to apply all that knowledge he had gained, but...

While I was growing up, he always 'tested' my own ability to perceive what he knew. And it was usually edgy stuff like this. My mother, on the other hand, would make sure I knew that his truths didn't have to be my own (very secretly, because my father was also a bigoted, drunken wife-beater). The combination resulted in a very thought-driven poet of sorts. So, while I usually can't resist thinking about stuff like this until I've concluded something about it, the 'conclusion' doesn't necessarily need to be something you'd find in the texts - and the results can usually end up being quite poetic.

Nothing: You're right, it's another short-circuiting subject. In fact, it's worse than forever for me. What was here before the 'big bang' (if you believe in that theory)? What the hell was here before nothing existed? It just blows my mind. I haven't developed any brain-settling theories there - 'poetic' or no. Ha!

I think I'll look up that book, thanks for mentioning it - I love this stuff, in case you couldn't tell.

I remember watching an episode of 'Bewitched', where Darren had to get Samantha back from the 16th century. After watching it, my father told me that the two who had traveled back in time would have been coughing the whole time they were there because the air was much different even then. It actually would have been 'too clean' for any of us to breathe easily.

I don't know how true that would be, but...density is probably what I was describing with that 'force' at the edge of the universe, as I put it. I think you explained it quite well, actually, with the farther we travel into space, the denser the lack of stuff gets. That does it for me!

I guess close to absolute zero. Maybe -200C

You're cool, OfTheSoul. Anyone who can parellel the matter of the universe with 'Bewitched' is okay in my book.

...oh, and a word of caution...if you haven't read Steiner before, his style is incredibly dense. Ha, 'dense'. Anyhoo, keep me posted.

If I'm there...it's hot hot hot!!!!!!

Neither could I - I am addicted to Discovery. What is your favourite show? I like the Ultimate Countdown.

-200 degrees fahrenheit...I really have no idea!

I am satisfied with the thought that nothing ever started and nothing will never end. As humans, with our finite lives, we need to measure time but in essence; there is no time - it's always now... It just is, always. I don't know if I'm making myself clear. I believe that what exists has always existed and just rearranges itself into different forms. You know, from "dust to dust" kind of thing... All of the molecules that make my body up are made of atoms (quarks - particles to the infinitely small - again, there's no end to small or big) have always been here, just not arranged as they are now in my body. We and all are really timeless...

Tell me if you get my drift... And no, I'm not stoned right now!

techiclly it would be undefined. Since temperature is techniclly the measure the average velocity of the molecules of an object, and since its nothing but space, you get 0/0, which is either 0, some made up arbitrary number between 0 and infinity (exclusivly), or infinity; depending on what formula would you use before lope-eh-talling it. (which I dont know because I am not a physics major).

If you threw water into space, it would evaporate due to lack of pressure. Unless it was allready in its solid state, then it would just stay that way. If you lit a match, the flame wouldnt "go up", and burn in a really cool spherical shape. If you put a person in space, xhe would neither freeze nor burn to death (just explode to death).

It would take a mathematitian / a philosopher,/ a phisists to answer this weird question.

-10 c

Cold. REALLY cold. Maybe a million degrees below zero?

I happen to believe the same you do concerning time. I don't believe time is anything but a measurement...in fact, it's a measurement of other things, not even of itself, because time - in my mind - just doesn't exist. The disturbing thing about this is that science - even Einstein - do not agree with us. They believe time is something tangible, and that it 'runs' in a certain direction or on a certain surface, like gravity.

I finally have bought into the 'big bang' theory (a little), but I still don't think science has the formations of solar systems quite right. They all believe that the planets were formed by big rocks smashing into one another at the birth of a solar system (the resulting star, really). The belief is that those bodies of junk became big enough that - in the final process of the making of the star (a big explosion outward from itself) - those bodies were large enough to 'fight' the outward explosion of radiation, to hang in wherever they were positioned. And the radiation is what shaped these objects into spheres.

I don't think that is the case - even as an eight year old, I had a different philosophy. I just think the formation of the star 'pitched out' big fireballs from itself, sending them into orbit around itself. I think perhaps only Pluto and Neptune orbited the sun in its early years - that the birth period of the star first 'pitched out' these two bodies. As they moved outward into space, in their orbits, their magnetic fields of gravity pulled the other 'planets' out of the churning star, one at a time. I don't think the world of science has ever conceived such a crazy idea, but - oddly - I've always 'known' this to be true, even as I have been taught differently.

So (in all) I'm like you - I buck the system when it comes to how people 'believe' in the existence of time. I admire the few who just don't buy what even science believes sometimes. Our own lives are too short to believe everything we read. Especially when, in our own short lives, we have seen how many times they have had to rewrite the texts!

Your answer is dead on, buddy!

I like all the scientific ones - Extreme Engineering, Tech Knowledge, etc. Then, I like the detectives shows - I, Detective, Double Agents, Forensics, etc. Also, the mysterious ones, like Unsolved History, are always fun. There are so many channels to Discovery these days, it's hard to keep up with them all.

There's also another cable channel called The Science Channel, I usually land on late at nights.

Once, my mother came running down the hallway to my rescue as I yelled for her (this was before I was even in Kindergarten). I regretted yelling for her help because, unfortunately, she threw open my door to find I was on the other side of it, with the doorknob stuck in my mouth. The idea to force the knob into my mouth also came from an episode of 'Bewitched', when Endora threw a little door over the mouth of 'Derwood', to shut him up.

I was quite the experimental kid. My poor mother would always have her head half-cocked at the sight of me. I was always doing weird things, to find out the possible results. One time, I came running into the living room with the cat gripping to the scalp of my head with its sharp claws. I had little streams of blood running down my forehead as I came screaming toward my confused mother, all because I wanted to see if the cat (as panicked as I was) would find it a fun ride atop my head. Ha!

gotta be pretty damn cold

I'm guessing 0 kelvin, -273 centigrade, really cold farenheit.
Theres nothing to warm, nothing to be warmed, and nothing to conduct any form of heat other than radiation. On the other hand, theres nothing to obstruct radiation either.
But then this a bit like 'schoedingers cat', the moment you place something there to be warmed, such as a thermometer, as long as there are some stars visible, there will be some warmth.

So this is what you've been up to. I've been woodworking towards making my guitar. (and just bought a new wardrobe today).

Some basic scientific understandings for you
Black: The absence of light
Vacuum: The absence of pressure.
Cold: The bascence of heat.
All three of those are zero points altered by the addition of light, matter, or energy.
A typical example: With a strong enough pump, one could pump water to the moon, provided the pump was at the bottom of the plumbing, however, if you put the an infinitely strong pump at the top of hill, it could only pump the water up 32 feet or so, because the most vacuum a pump can achieve is absolute vacuuum. The difference between atmospheric pressure (the active pushing force) and vacuum can only push water up 32 feet. Likewise, cold is just a lessor quantity of heat. Heat moves from areas of greater heat to those of lesser heat. Absolute Zero is -273 centigrade also called 0 kelvin (same scale, different starting place) ..lets see C--> F : c*(9/5)+32=f , (f-32)*(5/9)=c ... abs zero = -273c = -459.4f.
You'd enjoy a simple physics law of gas tempuratures P=T/V pressure=volume/temp (in kelvin) .... if you had a 12oz aerosol can at 300k & 40psi, and crushed it to half it's size, either it would go to 600k or the pressure would double to 80psi. Spraying the can considerably into the atmosphere increases the volume and reduces the pressure, so it's very cold at the nozzle.

Even back in 1963 mariner probes we were measuring interplanetary proton flux. If you go to NOAA's website these days you can daily weathar reports of interplanetary proton and neutron flux.
Yes, Einstein was short sighted. E=mc^2 : energy = mass * (speed of light)^2.
Speed is distance over time. Distance, and especially time are relative products of god consciousness. Therefore energy and matter are mind.
If you want something a bit more prototypical though, and the model of all matter being a kaleidoscopic duplicity of the same mother atom, and only the moment existing, future and past being imaginations of the moment; then may I suggest a model where all time exists permanently in linear fashion, such that the dinosaurs still exist in that time, but consciousness travels time like a road. Yesterday it visited June 5th, today it visits June 6th. The only reason that tim can even be said to travel forward, is that (for most people), one end of the road is remembered, and the other direction on the road is unknown. If we recalled the future, and forgot the past, we would say time flows in the other direction. It's purely a matter of consciousness. In meditation, god contains all time and geography, so if knowing the mind of god is your means of psychic vision, no place in time or space is harder to reach than another. Coming from a 2004 human experience, some places are certainly harder to make sense of though.
If you play with e=mc^2 more from a consciousness of god perspective, and apply some calculus limits, you'll find that from something emanates from nothing; the light is the void, and matter and time do not exist when you live in the absolute moment of god consciousness creation. Fun stuff, eh? Thank you Mr. Wizard.
I've just decided to resume my work of this sort, which I had abandoned for a couple years. Back to being a kabbalist rabbi. Hindu Cosmology and the I-Ching are about the same stuff. It perplexes me that this is the last sort of thing christianity likes to examine. The nature of god is almost a taboo subject, sure you get your ezekiel wheel stuff now and then, but it's rare.

wow!!!, I impressed someone this month!!

Amazing, and this early too. I am off on a good start!

> I finally have bought into the 'big bang' theory (a little),

I prefer the polar theory myself.

> So (in all) I'm like you - I buck the system when it comes to how
> people 'believe' in the existence of time. I admire the few who just
> don't buy what even science believes sometimes. Our own lives are

Yeah, a lot of these theorys are a load of crap, IMO. The whole time thing debate is just silly, since time doesnt really exist. Its just a human construct, as not everything happens simoustianiously, we must have a way to measure this property that does this.

However, I do like the multi-verse theory (though I dont buy the time-line explanation of it).


> too short to believe everything we read. Especially when, in our
> own short lives, we have seen how many times they have had to rewrite
> the texts!

yeah, science is self-critical like that. Unlike religion (with the excpetion of Protestant-ism). Thats why I like it. I find the scientific process quite fasinating, to tell you the truth.

I dunno. Really cold. -100 C

...and...are we still as inquisitive/experimental as an adult?
I do admit...I haven't any childhood stories which compare.

Yeah! So true...

Speaking of time, I'm running out of it! I have to get to work!

I would have chosen Orange soda, as well. I think the question was asked in the 1986 film, "Pretty in Pink"...the lead was so loving and giving, and confused at times. She said something to the effect, 'i have better things to do with my time than thinking about the temperature in outer space.'

70 degrees fahrenheit?

Space looks really cold. Sort of like underwater. But colder.
But I don't really know.

Um..cold.

i'm no good with temp or distance. i know hot, cold, near, far. those such things. i haven't a clue.

as far from any energy source as you could possible be? i'm guessing pretty close to absolute zero, 0 degrees Kelvin, -273 Celsius...But probably a little above that, there has to be some stray rays of some kind of energy passing through the empty space.

hmmm
no stars around to heat it up...

-506 Farenheight.

It would probably be absolute zero or just above. So -273 to -270 degrees celcius.
Of course, because it was an absolute vacuum this would neither be here nor there. I did some reading on this a week or so ago after watching the tripe that is "Mission to Mars". Tim Robbins' character in the film commits suicide by removing the helmet of his space suit. This is in a bid to prevent his wife from killing herself whilst trying to rescue him. Within five seconds his head is entirely frozen, as if he'd dipped his head into a basin full of liquid nitrogen.
Compare that to "2001: A Space Odyssey" in which Dave Bowman jumps the gap between his pod and the airlock, surviving around 10 seconds in what is essentially 'open space'.
According to the experts, you could retain consciousness for up to 10 seconds in 'space' and probably survive up to another minute without suffering any permanent damage. The moisture on the surface of your skin would freeze pretty quickly, but you'd be able to maintain your core temperature for a lot longer.

If the depressurisation doesn't kill us. Can humans even survive in zero atmosphere pressure, even if they find a means of oxygenating the blood? Well, probably, I guess our cells are held together without counter-pressure.

The rapid decompression could indeed have very serious effects. The best thing you could possibly do would be to not hold your breath or else you'd suffer from the mother of all cases of bends. Although this would mean that you'd lose consciousness quicker because you'd more rapidly run out of oxygenated blood and hypoxia would set in. Also, if your mouth was open and your passageways clear, you'd probably feel the water in your mouth freezing before you lost consciousness.
It sounds silly but a properly fitted elastic garment could help to prevent the onset of ebullism too. But eventually water vapour would collect in the soft tissues, your body would swell to nearly twice its size and your blood pressure would even out to the point where there was no circulation. And once your heart stopped, that would be it.

When I was a kid I cleverly swam to the bottom of the 8' swimming pool with a garden hose to use as a snorkel. The moment I took my thumb off and opened my lungs, I was flattened by the pressure and had to scramble for the surface totally empty of air.

There's a reason they only make snorkels up to a certain length! Anything over about 3' and your lungs wouldn't be able to cope with the difference in pressure.

75 degrees Fahrenheit