Paradox? - Page 2

In fact, within the containers of gas, the molecular energy that is represented by should decrease to the point that a pressure differential could not exist?

quote:

---

Hmm . . let me see if I can do this star trek thingy, again?

---

As pointed out earlier, a residual form such as molecules would contain residual energy to maintain that form? So where does that energy come from? Let's see, matter has inertia & occupies space. Inertia, Ya, so we sit on {in} the crust of the earth; with an insulated container {what is it insulated from?} where we lower the temperature. We isolate from energy? So it is exist relative to the earth, which means it is in constant motion, force is being continually supplied by the large mass rotation? That the results of the relative motion of the earth would via its inertia mass rotation would produce a continual change or flux within the center of mass [nucleus]?
If Absolute Zero existed, where in our natural world would it exist? Well, it wouldn't exist in our world, would it? Well, how about in one of those space capsules, once they enter the outer space of our solar system? The nebula (inertial mass) of our own? etc => ad infinitum?

So science states that the at some level, we have the inertia => rotational momentum of our spin. Then another is represented by the earth-moon spin, then another by our solar system; as our system is part of a larger (greater) system called the Milky Way, etc.
Then the question arises 'Why would those actions (bonds) stop at the molecular? So we could question does perception of particles in space continue or include our own space?Perhaps those strange considerations of the D & F orbitals, exist as or at least in the inertial form of these extensions of our (solar) system in space? Why the additional 'at least in the inertial form' , because we haven't really discussed an aspect of inertia. Which is to say as we in the relative sense are in constant motion to these other reference system, we tend not to note their inertia relative to our own system. Thus even as we extend our perception from the flat earth to a revolving planet within a system of planets, etc., we may be imposing an aspect of inertia (mass & energy) which includes aspects of phase & phase relationship (3-d & time). So we are in fact setting a (relative) absolute value as our reference system?
To an extent, you could say that because the inertial function is continually changing then the spatial relationship must continually (constant) change in order to maintain the spatial relationship. Our view of the '3-d & time' then represents or has an aspect similar to the implied STP, setting a particular value as Absolute Zero against which we relate other values too.

nope atoms were cold without vibration and then gravity formed stars and fusions started which released energy from atom nucleus and that energy was light which vibrated the atoms to cause heat. so that means that atoms made light which struck atoms and vibrated them to contain heat. so it is not chicken or egg crap!!!! so by the way when the big bang happened according to physics it was pure energy which is light and it only late condensed to matter which could mean that not all the energy condensed which is proven by the microwave background and the light was absorbed then to make them vibrate and contain heat.