Nope. Let's play a game of "who has reasonable credentials to back up their claim"

I took two graduate-level thermal physics courses, and had two separate PhD instructors each teach a semester of agony in the form of partial differential equations of entropy. We used one book that nobody seems to have heard of, and one printed by Oxford University and used in their (presumably even more rigorous since I was at a state university) Thermal Physics curriculum.

So let's see your YahooAnswers quotation about absolute hot. You're so Dunning-Kreuger it hurts.

Kind of. We put everybody with that kind of snobbish attitude into our own oversized Thunderdome and put warning signs around it reading "Beware Troll Area!". Over time several of these signs got letters changed & removed and now read "Bavaria".

Then you should be aware that negative temperature isn't achievable. I may not have specialized in thermodynamics but I am a physicist nonetheless.

Are you telling me it's never been negative Celsius where you live?

And it shall never be.

You only think so because you've never seen the look most women give me when I try to talk to them.

EDIT: Damn it, having read the link provided by OneFiercePuppy I must revoke this joke, it doesn't work. Move along everybody.

Apparently you're a bad one, since you said "degrees Kelvin" which anyone with even a basic undergraduate understanding of thermodynamics knows is nonsense. Kelvins aren't degrees. But I'm going to forgive that since let's face it, everyone says degrees to measure temperature. Even color temperature which I never really understood.

Negative temperatures are achieveable through population inversions often seen in high-energy laser systems. Don't pick nerd fights on the internet without looking at your notes first. It's FULL OF NERDS.

Now you're arguing semantics to gain some validity to your arguments? Did they also teach you straw-man techniques in your post-grads?
By the way, do you want to pick a fight about lasers now? Because you might be thermoking, but I'm a photonics and optoelectronics postgrad. Keep telling me about high-energy lasers. Go on. Teach me.

You don't even know what we're arguing about. :)

Do I ever?

http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.103.20
Negative Temperatures can exist. A system with negative temperature isn't colder than Absolute Zero. It's hotter than any positive temperature. So yes, Absolute Zero is the coldest temperature, and Negative Temperatures can exist. Not a paradox, just a different definition of what Temperature is.

THANK YOU

Both at you and at tinyE: we're talking about negative temperatures as a way to reach infinite hotness (-0K). We're talking about negative temperature systems, by definition hotter than positive temperature systems. You're bringing absoloute zero into this for what? As a point in the scale? Because that's the only way it fits into this whole argument.

Yes. To call something negative, it means that it must be lower than zero. If we are talking about the Kelvin scale, the zero on said scale is the absolute zero, so negative on the Kelvin scale means lower than that, which cannot exist (or at least we do not believe it can exist). A Negative Temperature on the Kelvin scale though does not mean that it's colder than absolute zero, thus no paradox.