AntiSleep seams to think an infinite amount of bacon would come out.

Ok well instead of bringing up equations of whether or not antisleep is right, I'm going to relate it to the atomic bomb.

A decent sized atomic bomb (maybe about the size of a small room I guess) when detonated produces about 3 million degrees f. An atomic bomb gets that energy from actualy breaking down matter into energy.
Now if we were to reverse that, such as the bacon question, with room temperature being at about 70 degrees f instead of 3 millon, one could assume you would not get very much bacon.

Anyone care to comment? Not quite sure what I said is reasonable, but it makes some sense to me.

That's been said several times here.

If you converted all the thermal energy in the room into bacon, you would end up with exactly 7 pieces. Assuming, naturally, that you converted all the radiation from the sun during the time light travels 1 meter into French Toast. Additionally, you'd need to convert at least eight or nine gamma rays to excite an electron in a plutonium atom and set off the chain reaction which produces butter, syrup, and hand warmers. Afterwards, I advise travelling to the nearest convenience store to pick up a fork and knife, since the room in which you converted into bacon is no longer there (since the earth is not stationary within the greater universe), and naturally you were doing this in the kitchen where you keep all of your eating utensils, therefore, all of your eating utensils are gone and you need more.

Sorry for the double post, but I believe this should be separated since my previous post was completely relevant to the topic, and this one is not.

Ejac, first off, since you're in an AP Chem class, you should know that you have to be in Kelvin, not Farenheit. Secondly, during a nuclear reaction not all of the mass of the atoms is converted into energy. In fact, it's a very small amount, but the speed is light is very large, which makes it a very large amount of energy. Something I find very interesting, and I mentioned in my previous post, is that if 100% of the thermal energy of a room was converted into bacon, the room would not be moving. Completely immobile within the universe. Excluding the rotation of the earth, we're still not in an inertial reference frame because there are so damn many forces in the universe, even though most are negligible. Since no one has ever observed something that isn't moving, we don't really have a good way to theorize (since none of us are Einstein, I don't think we've published any relevant revolutionary theories lately) what happens when something is completely immobile. So don't bother! Post crazy stuff, like this forum is supposed to be used for!

Your fallacy is that you assume that there IS a universal still, even when it is not necessary.

Thermal energy is basically (note that I didn't say exactly) temperature. If all the atoms were still (relative to each other), they would have zero thermal energy.
Temperatures of near 0 have been achieved. These atoms were still moving around the Earth, which was moving around the Sun. They were stationary relative to the observing equipment, and nearly completely still relative to each other. This is very similar to matter AT 0.

Also, to anyone who thinks matter can't be at 0, let me clarify. Getting matter to absolute 0, or any exact temperature/speed/mass is EXPERIMENTALLY impossible, not theoretically impossible. We can't practically GET matter to 0, but there is no reason it couldn't be there.

The thermal energy of the walls would radiate and warm the bacon, giving you no bacon with no thermal energy, and very little bacon that's very very cold.

Aren't the walls part of the room? If they are then their thermal energy is being converted into bacon and not warming the bacon. Can we get a better definition of "a room"?

Do you realize Chemistry and nuclear reactions (Physics) are not that related? Sorry, I'm not very goot an Kelvin, I would do that in Celsius, but it's amazing how people do not understand celsius.

1.8C+32=F

Secondly, I do know that a very small percentage of the matter is broken down into energy, but I didn't feel like writing an essay for this. Modern day nuclear weapons break down alittle less than 10%. The bombs dropped on Japan during WWII were around 1%.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Dec 30 2007, 4:55 am by Ejac.

You'd break Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle if you did this.

The room includes the walls, ceiling, the roof above the room if there is one, support structures holding the room together (i.e. the foundation, or rafters), and everything in the room, but NOT adjacent rooms and/or structures. If we turn all of the thermal energy from your room into bacon, we aren't touching your hallway.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Dec 31 2007, 2:21 am by FatalException.

You can't take the thermal energy from something unless it's in a perfect vacuum.

Wording error. Fixed.

Gets my vote for best answer.

You can never take energy from something... Energy can only be given.

And cooling something doesn't need a vacuum to perform, simply pressure differences work.