Not really. Temperature is one of those odd-ball scales where there's a real, absolute 0 to it. Years of debate converged on a physical reality.
People acting as groups exchanging capital is just as real as atoms acting as groups exchanging energy.
No. The concept of temperature is based on the bulk interactions of matter due to the motion/collisions of atoms and molecules relative to an inertial reference frame. A frame that usually has to exist outside of the system for temperature to have practical meaning so it is a concept that by definition has an absolute zero, even if we haven't observed it yet.
In this case, absolute zero really means zero motion relative to the instrument measuring the sample so it is possible for a Type 1+ civilization to build a planet sized (or bigger, don't know how the math works out but it probably has something to do with constricting atoms to a precision within a planck length) laser or other electromagnetic trap to cool some nontrivial number of atoms to absolute zero like those used for Bose-Einsten condensate experiments.
It may be possible, but we seem to be a very long way away from being able to test such a hypothesis.
Let me turn this around. What do you think the hypothesis is, and how would you know if you've succeeded? Do not use the term "absolute zero" because you think that is a hypothesis, and not a definition.
Your position is absurd. It's equivalent of saying, that distance is an unproven hypothesis, (which literally doesn't make any sense, because that's not what the word means), or perhaps more charitably a suspicious concept because we've never measured anything with zero distance between two items, because the closest two particle can get is planck length.
I'm not trying to be mean, but what you've been saying is pure gibberish.
You really need to understand the order of dependence of explanations.
Temperature scale is a good model that maps the territory quite well. There is nothing to suggest it will suddenly stop working at 0K, if it works very well even as we get closer and closer to absolute zero.
Contrast with most economic models which as maps correspond to territory in a similar way the map of China corresponds to the Middle Earth - there are trees and not trees, you have to turn it around to make the sea be on the proper side, and... that's about how much it matches. Be wary of zooming too much in, lest you get eaten by an Orc.
In fact, there is a good argument that 0k is unachievable [0].
[0] http://wordpress.mrreid.org/2014/07/03/why-cant-we-get-to-ab...