He never said 0 C or 0 F. If he means 0 C, then twice as cold would be -136.58 C.
Last edited:
Little Brain Teaser For You
- Thread starter Legit^
- Start date
He never said 0 C or 0 F. If he means 0 C, then twice as cold would be -136.58 C.
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2009
- Messages
- 1,131
He said freezing, and freezing is 32F or 0C.....
lol I said 0 degrees, and that could be a number of things.
Celsius, Kelvin, Fahrenheit, Rankine, R?aumu etc...
So the way its worded you can't answer it
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2009
- Messages
- 722
lol I said 0 degrees, and that could be a number of things.
Celsius, Kelvin, Fahrenheit, Rankine, R?aumu etc...
So the way its worded you can't answer it
Sure you can, if you convert the 0 degrees to another form of measurement, then you can solve it
You kind of need to know what you're converting FROM though
I'm still waiting for a response...
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2009
- Messages
- 1,209
-1 ! :d
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2009
- Messages
- 1,047
-136.15 c
-229.855 f
-229.855 f
Last edited:
assuming 0 degrees Celsius
the conversion to kelvin is +273.15
since the basis of kelvin is about absolute 0 which all motion stops (or something like that/ absence of energy) it is a true measure of thermal energy so once in kelvin you can / 2
273.15 /2 = 136.575 k
back to Celsius 136.575 - 273.15 = -136.575 C
which is what snuf said. 1st
just more clarification
by stating degrees he implies the measure is not in Kelvin. There are no degrees Kelvin; it is simply Kelvin. Therefore solvable
the conversion to kelvin is +273.15
since the basis of kelvin is about absolute 0 which all motion stops (or something like that/ absence of energy) it is a true measure of thermal energy so once in kelvin you can / 2
273.15 /2 = 136.575 k
back to Celsius 136.575 - 273.15 = -136.575 C
which is what snuf said. 1st
just more clarification
by stating degrees he implies the measure is not in Kelvin. There are no degrees Kelvin; it is simply Kelvin. Therefore solvable
Last edited:
Similar threads
