Why would'nt this work?
Why would'nt this work?
It can look dumb, but I always had this question as a kid, what physical principles would prevent this?
Why would'nt this work?
It can look dumb, but I always had this question as a kid, what physical principles would prevent this?
So have to ask what a solid is to answer this question.
Sticks are quite complex, so lets consider a simpler solid: an elementally pure iron rod.
You can imagine said rod as if it were a fixed array of crystalline atomic cores surrounded by a jelly-like substance. In this 'jellium' model the atomic cores have a positive charge, they are the protons and neutrons, and the jelly has a negative charge. The jelly is the wavefunction that represents the electron structure in bulk. If that makes no sense, congrats on knowing your limits.
You've probably seen the more modern model of an atom where there's a nucleus and around it is an electron fuzz with discrete energy levels. Or if you've studied at uni strange geometry representing a threshold in probability of finding the electron/s there on a given measurement (if not familiar under certain conditions reality kinda unfocuses it's eyes and things that we often think of as points become volumes of possible effect). This is a good model of a single atom, but when we bring atoms together they change each other's properties and the result is that these density functions (the weird electron cloud/shape things) start to blur together.
In our iron rod the electrons delocalize sufficiently we can kinda think of it as a weird jelly. A real stick is more complex, but can kinda be thought of as a stack of smaller jelly treats packed against each other.
When you push on the rod you're mashing the jelly of your hand into the jelly of the rod, this causes a shockwave that begins to spread, it propagates like a ripple in a skipping rope or a bounce on a trampoline. But since it's moving 'amount of electron like properties here'. That makes some areas more negatively charged which drags the positively charged atom cores slowly after it. It moves much slower than the speed of light as we aren't considering individual electrons which can move energy between them via photons, but the propagation of a disturbance in the collective arrangement of many that are tightly linked (we say coupled).
We can't imagine a stick that is perfectly rigid because we would be proposing a kind of matter that does not exist, one which isn't made of a lot of fuzzy electron jelly stuff but something else entirely. We can imagine matter where the jelly is very stiff, and consequently less energy goes into wobbling it all about and the squish moves forward very fast but that speed is still much slower than light because of this collective behaviour.
Alright now eli5? Everything is jelly?
Sorta. I found this video a while back that helped me understand it. Pay attention to the clock hands part and how the movement is affected by how fast information is traveling in them. It’s basically the same idea as the stick but a different direction.
Everything bends when you move it, usually to such a small degree that you can't perceive it. It's impossible to have a truly "rigid" material that would be required for the original post because of this. The atoms in a solid object don't all move simultaneously, otherwise swinging a bat would be causing FTL propagation itself. The movement needs to propagate through the atoms, the more rigid the object the faster this happens, but it is never instantaneous. You can picture the atoms like a lattice of pool balls connected to each other with springs. The more rigid the material, the stiffer the springs, but there will always be at least a little flex, even if you need to zoom in and slow-mo to see it.
Everything soft and slow like your brain yes.
This is an excellently written response.
It's pretty hand wavy. The question: why is the speed of sound so slow? (which is essentially isomorphic to this one) is pretty hard to answer. I can't do the the maths to derive it anymore haha.
There are similar things about light slowdown during refraction and stuff.
It's just much easier to view certain bulk phenomena as waves in homogeneous material but it can be very unsatisfactory. Hence all the bullshit artists in this thread talking about speed limits, the standard model, and time dilation. For some reason "it just be that way ok?" feels more satisfying if the thing you're asserting seems more fundamental, but it doesn't really make stuff clearer.
I could've sworn I saw a video about this and the gist is that it's called "speed of push" and is essentially the speed of sound. When you push something, you're compressing the molecules of it and that will travel like a wave through it. Light travels faster than that wave.
I'm probably explaining wrong because it's something I'm half remembering from a video I could've seen over a decade ago, but that's the quick explanation.
It was Alpha Phoenix
The stick would only move at the speed of sound. Or the speed the molecules can push against each other, which is the speed of sound in that material.
Even if the stick were made of the hardest known material, the information would take about 7 hours to travel from Earth to the Moon, according to the equation relating Young's modulus and the material's density.
Also, even if you could somehow pull the stick, Newton’s Second Law (F = ma) tells us that the force required to move it depends on its mass and desired acceleration. If the stick were made of steel with a 1 cm radius, it would have a mass of approximately 754×10^6kg due to its enormous length. Now, if you tried to give it just a tiny acceleration of 0.01 m/s² (barely noticeable movement), the required force would be:
F = (754×106) × (0.01) = 7.54×106 N
That’s 7.54 MN, equivalent to the thrust of a Saturn V rocket, just to make it move at all! And that’s not even considering internal stresses, gravity differences, or the fact that the force wouldn’t propagate instantly through the stick.
The motion of the stick will actually only propagate to the other end at the speed of sound in the material the stick is made of.
So when you pull on the stick and it doesnt immediately get pulled back on the other side, you are, at that instant, creating more stick?
You're not creating more stick, but you're making the stick longer. The pressure wave in the stick will travel at the speed of sound in the stick which will be faster than sound in air, but orders of magnitude slower than light.
Everything has some elasticity. Rigidity is an illusion . Things that feel rigid to us are rigid in human terms only.
It would stretch like a rubber band stretches just a lot less. Wood, metal, whatever is slightly flexible. The stick would either get slightly thinner or slightly less dense as you pulled it. Also, you won't be able to pull it much because there's so much stick.
You know what's more crazy. Electrons don't flow at the speed of light through a wire. Current is like Newtons Cradle, you push one electron in on one side and another bounces out on the other side, that happens at almost light speed. But individual electrons only travel at roughly 1cm per second trough a wire.
You are slightly and temporarily increasing the spacing between atoms/compounds in the stick. This spacing will effectively travel like a shockwave of "pull" down the stick.
Something about objects don't move instantaneously but at the speed of sound that material has, so the stick would move way later. If you think about it, speed of sound inside a medium is basically how fast the particles inside that medium can send energy from one another.
Yep. Like holding a jump rope between two people, and one of them sends a wave through it to the other. The force still has to travel through the material.
Objects like an unbreakable stick are still composed of atoms suspended in space and held together by the fundamental forces of nature. When you push on one end, the other end doesn't immediately move with it but rather the object experiences a wave of compression traveling through it. This wave of compression travels faster than we can perceive but still cannot travel faster than light.
Look up why arrows bend after they've been released by a bow, it's essentially the same mechanic.
If your stick is unbreakable and unavoidable you have already broken laws of physics anyway
If your stick is unbreakable and unavoidable you have already broken laws of physics anyway
You have it backwards: if your stick is unavoidable, NOT HAVING IT is the impossible thing.
Autocorrected from unfoldable. This is what I get for occasionally browsing on a shitty Amazon tablet. At least it was cheap to the point of being almost free.
In carrot vs stick terms, this is the most unfortunate fellow: he who can't avoid the stick.
...so the thing is that, after accounting for time dilation, light is instantaneous and perhaps better-described as the speed of causality...even a 'perfect stick' comprising quantum-crystal wonder-material can't move before it's pushed, so you'd find that it, too, transmits information at the speed of light...
You're pushing the atoms on your end, which in turn push the next atoms, which push the next ones and so on up to the atoms at the end of the rod which push the hand of your friend on the moon.
As it so happens the way the atoms push each other is electromagnetism, in other words sending photons (same thing light is made of) to each other but these photons are not at visible wavelengths so you don't see them as light.
So pushing the rod is just sending a wave down the rod of atoms pushing each other with the gaps between atoms being bridged using photons, so it will never be faster than the speed at which photons can travel in vacuum (it's actually slower because part of the movement of that wave is not the lightspeed-travelling photons bridging the gaps between atoms but the actual atoms moving and atoms have mass so they cannot travel as fast as the speed of light).
In normal day to day life the rods are far too short for us to notice the delay between the pushing the rod on one end and the rod pushing something on the other end.
Thank you for this. Everything above it was just people saying the stick would move slower than light, nothing about why!
Very well put.
As it so happens the way the atoms push each other is electromagnetism, in other words sending photons (same thing light is made of) to each other but these photons are not at visible wavelengths so you don't see them as light.
Wat? I strongly believe you are not correct. Which is to say, I think you are talking out of your arse entirely. If you push on a thing you peturb the electron structure of the material. These peturbations propagate as vibratory modes modeled as phonons.
While technically some of this energy is emitted as thermal radiation that is not primarily where it goes. And phonons themselves propagate at a slower rate than the speed of light, a significantly slower rate. Like a million times slower.
The compression on the end of the stick wouldn't travel faster than the speed of sound in the stick making it MUCH slower than light.
But.. But.. The stick is unfoldable!
You said unfoldable not non-compressible. Your fault.
it wouldn't work, because there is no unbreakable, unfoldable stick. the stick will have flex, and the force transmitted will occur much more slowly through the molecular chain of the stick than light's travel time.
reality is much more woobly and spongy than you know.
Okay for a thought experiment what if it’s a perfect element incapable of that?
"Ok, well, humans can't just teleport wherever they want, but what if they could?"
well, then they could, I guess.
Like some sort of material that has a speed of sound close or equal to the speed of light? Then yeah, it would move about the same speed as the speed of light.
The problem is that when you push an object, the push happens at the speed of sound in that object. It's very fast but not anywhere near the speed of light. If you tapped one end of the stick, you would hear it on the moon after the wave had traveled the distance.
For example, the speed of sound in wood is around 3,300 m/s so 384,400/3,300 ~= 32.36 hours to see the pole move on the moon after you tap it on earth.
Your math is off. The Moon is about 384,400 KILOmeters from the Earth, not meters. So 116,485 seconds, or a bit over 32 hours.
Oh right. I'll edit my comment
I swear I've seen a video of someone timing the speed of pushing a very long pole to prove this very thing. If I can find it I'll post it here.
*Found it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqhXsEgLMJ0 I can't speak to the rigorousness of the experiment, but I remember finding it enlightening.
AlphaPhoenix is definitely one of the best scientists on YouTube, that video is good.
Cool vid, thanks for sharing
Damn, so that means no FTL communication for now... 😅
Wow, TIL that the speed of sound has this equivalence
Exactly
When you push something you push the atoms in the thing. This in turn pushes the adjacent atoms, when push the adjacent atoms all the way down the line. Very much like pushing water in the bathtub, it ripples down the line. The speed at which atoms propogate this ripple is the speed of sound. In air this is roughly 700mph, but as the substance gets harder* it gets faster. For example, aluminum and steel it is about 11,000mph. That's why there's a movie trope about putting your ear to the railroad line to hear the train.
If you are talking about something magically hard then I suppose the speed of sound in that material could approach the speed of light, but still not surpass it. Nothing with mass may travel the speed of light, not even an electron, let alone nuclei.
*generalizing
Best answer
There's a thought experiment about this in most intro classes on relativity, talking about "length compression". To a stationary observer a fast-moving object appears shorter in its direction of travel. For example, at about 87% of the speed of light, length compression is about 50%. If you are interested in the formula look up Relativistic Length Compression. Anyway, if you are carrying a pole 20 meters long and you run past someone at that speed, to them the pole will only look 10 meters long.
In the thought experiment you run with this pole into a barn that's only 10 meters long. What happens?
The observer, seeing you bringing a 10-meter pole into a 10-meter barn, shuts the door behind you, closing it exactly at the point where you're entirely in the barn. What happens when you stop, and how does a 20-meter pole fit in a 10-meter barn in the first place?
First, when the pole gets in the barn and the door closes, the pole is no longer moving, so now to the observer it looks 20 meters long. As its speed drops to zero the pole appears to get longer, becoming 20 meters again. It either punches holes in the barn and sticks out, or it shatters if the barn is stronger.
Looking at the situation from the runner's point of view, since motion is relative you could say you're stationary and the barn is moving toward you at 87% of the speed of light. So to you the 10-meter barn only looks 5 meters long. So how does a 20-meter pole fit in?
The answer to both questions is compression - or saying it another way, information doesn't travel instantly. When the front end of the pole hits the inside of the barn and stops, it takes some time for that information to travel through the pole to the other end. Meanwhile, the rest of the pole keeps moving. By the time the back end knows it's supposed to stop, from the runner's point of view the 20-ft pole has been compressed down to 5 meters. From the runner's point of view the barn then stops moving, so it's length returns to 10 meters, but since the pole still won't fit it either punches holes in the barn or shatters.
One of my physics profs had double-majored in theatre, and loved to perform this demo with a telescoping pole and a cardboard barn.
but since the pole still won’t fit it either punches holes in the barn or shatters.
Latest research is suggesting that the observer from the pole's perspective sees the far door open before the near door, basically reversing the order of events. (Assuming the barn doors close briefly around to contain the pole, and then open again to let it through. The Barn sees the entire pole momentarily inside the barn with both doors closed, the pole sees itself enter the short barn, the far door closes briefly and then opens letting the front of the pole through, then the back door closes and opens as it passes through. IE: order of events can be recorded differently for each observer without breaking causality.)
This is a nice example that also makes me think more questions.
Gets more interesting
The punching-through should start at the point of impact, since that end of the pole and that spot on the wall pole both know about the collision at that moment, and then the information travels back through the pole. So I think the front end of the pole would start breaking through the wall immediately, while the information about the impact is still traveling back through the pole. For that reason I think the front end of the pole might end up sticking farther out of the barn than the back end, because it has more time to so it. Would be interesting math, which I've never tried to figure out.
There can't be infinite deceleration, for the same reason that the back end of the pole can't instantly know the front end has run into the wall. Deceleration travels back through the length of the pole as its atoms squish up against the atoms in front of them and slow down.
Interesting for sure!
The problem lies in what "unstretchable" and "unbendable" means. Its always molecules and your push takes time to reach the other end. You think its instantaneous because you never held such a long stick. The push signal is slower than the light
You think its instantaneous because you never held such a long stick.
Speak for yourself! 😏
Tbh I thought someone would make that joke when i wrote it lol
Alas, the longer the stick is, the floppier it gets.
I would liken it to a long freight train starting to move. Once the front starts moving, it will still be a minute before the back starts moving. The space between the train couplings is like the spring effect between atoms, or something.
You're forgetting the speed at which the shockwave from the compression travels through the stick. I guess it's around the speed of sound in that material, which might be ~2 km/s
Well no. As others have said the force in the pole will travel at the speed of sound.
Though if you were to wiggle the flashlight back and forth really fast the spotlight on the moon would travel "faster" than the speed of light.
It would work, but only in the impossible world where you have a perfectly rigid unbreakable stick. But such an object cannot exist in this universe.
Pick up a solid rigid object near you. Anything will do, a coffee cup, a comb, a water bottle, anything. Pick it up from the top and lift it vertically. Observe it.
It seems as though the whole object moves instantaneously, does it not? It seems that the bottom of the object starts moving at the exact same instant as the top. But it is actually not the case. Every material has a certain elasticity to it. Everything deforms slightly under the tiniest of forces. Even a solid titanium rod deforms a little bit from the weight of a feather placed upon it. And this lack of perfect rigidity means that there is a very, very slight delay from when you start lifting the top of the object to when the bottom of it starts moving.
For small objects that you can manipulate with your hands, this delay is imperceptible to your senses. But if you observed an object being lifted with very precise scientific equipment, you could actually measure this delay. Motion can only transfer through objects at a finite speed. Specifically, it can only move at the speed of sound through the material. Your perfectly rigid object would have an infinite speed of sound within it. So yes, it would instantly transfer that motion. But with any real material, the delay wouldn't just be noticeable, but comically large.
Imagine this stick were made of steel. The speed of sound in steel is about 5120 m/s. The distance to the Moon is about 400,000 km. Converting and dividing shows that it would actually take about 22 hours for a pulse like that to travel through a steel pole that long. (Ignoring how the steel pole would be supported.)
So in fact, you are both right and wrong. You are correct for the object you describe. A perfectly rigid object would be usable as a tool of FTL communication. But such an object simply cannot exist in this universe.
that makes sense, i forgot that pushing something is basically like creating a sound wave on it ^^' thank you :)
A perfectly rigid object would be usable as a tool of FTL communication
Would it though? I feel like the theoretical limit is still c
Yes, that's the point. The limit c denies the possibility of a perfectly rigid body existing physically. It can only exist as a thought experiment.
Yes, the speed of sound in an object is how fast neighboring atoms can react to each other, and not only is that information (therefore limited to C already) but specifically it's the electric field caused by the electrons that keep atoms certain distances from each other and push each other around. And changes in the electric/magnetic fields are famously carried by photons (light) specifically - so even in bulk those changes move at the speed of light at most
It's even wilder when you take the concept of ridgidity and transfer of energy out of the equation and just think in terms of pure information propagating though a light cone. Rigidity itself is a function of information.
Username checks out.
As an object becomes "closer" to a perfectly rigid object it becomes denser, would such an object eventually collapse onto itself and become a black hole? Or is there another limit to how dense/rigid an object can be?
Seems likely. The most rigid materially known, (or at least theorized) is nuclear pasta.. Nuclear pasta only forms inside neutron stars, stellar objects that are the last stage of matter before matter gives up entirely and collapses into a black hole.
Great explanation, thank you!
Even if it were perfectly rigid, supernaturally so, your push would still only transmit through the stick at the speed of light. The speed of light is the speed of time.
The push would travel at the speed of sound in the stick, much slower than the speed of light
In a "perfectly rigid" stick (a fictional invention), the speed of sound is the speed of light.
Your push would travel at the speed of sound in the stick. You could think of hitting a pipe with a hammer, the sound of the hit would travel at the speed of sound, same is true for you pushing the stick.
For anyone looking for other cool ideas or videos about speed of light etc
What Is The Speed of Dark? - Vsauce (13m:31s)
The Faster-Than-Light Guillotine - Because Science (w/ Kyle Hill) (14m:19s)
Here's a video that actually kinda answers the question:
I enjoyed a lot of the discussion in the comments
There's no such thing as a perfectly rigid object.
There was, but now I'm getting older and more tired
Have you spoken to your healthcare provider about Viagratm? It may be able to help with your issue. (Please seek immediate medical help with an erection lasting more than 4 hours).
So I found a dowel rod online that's 1 meter long by 25 mm in diameter made of beech, which is pretty typical for this kind of rod. Each rod weighs 420 g. 300,000 km is 300,000,000 m. So for a dowel rod to be 300,000,000 m long, it would weigh 126,000,000,000 g, or 126,000,000 kg. You would never be able to push this rod. If you had a magical hydraulic ram that could, it would just compress the soil under it. This is on the scale of the foce released from an atomic bomb.
But let's throw that out and pretend the whole thing weighs 420 grams instead. Maybe it's made of a novel, space-age material instead of beech. And since you've said it can't bend or break, the portion at the surface of the earth would be spinning at roughly 1,000 kph (due to the rotation of the earth), and the portion at the end of the rod would be spinning at about 28 km/s. Most of the mass of the rod would be spinning faster than escape velocity, so you wouldn't be able to hold onto it. It would be gone almost instantly.
Let's pretend you could hold onto it. Then the person on the moon couldn't hold it, because the earth rotates on its axis about 28 times faster than the moon travels around its orbit. So you can see how this problem devolves into ever more layers of magic and hand-waiving.
The final problem is the fundamental difference between classroom physics and material engineering. If you could fix the moon to the end of the rod, and you used a space-age material that weighs 420 g for the whole thing, and it could be so rigid as to not bend, then it would have to break instead. If, instead, it's designed to not break, then it must be able to bend. This is just how real materials work. But even if it does neither, or at most only bends a little, it is still true that as you push on the rod it would compress. So the tip wouldn't move at first. The pressure would move through the rod like a wave. You can't send information faster than light.
Yes, about my setting, it was pretty much an excuse to illustrate the experiment, with like you said, a bit too much of magic.
The moon being on a straight distance of approximately 1 light second, i didn't had found another place to put this experiment on. So I didn't take into account the herculean strengh needed, the movement of the earth and the moon and the gravity.
Someone gave a link to an answer of my question, with a more realistic take on the position of the other end, but your explanations are still welcome for this moon setting and the "moon elevator" problem :)
(i know i may have broken english sometimes, sorry about that)
(i know i may have broken english sometimes, sorry about that)
Not at all! I couldn't tell you aren't a native speaker. Regarding a "moon elevator", or more realistically a space elevator, these kinds of Herculean physics problems are exactly what people are trying to iron out. The forces involved are astronomical.
Yeah IIRC that even applies to things like gravity as well. As in, we aren't actually orbiting around where is sun is, we're orbiting around where it was ~8 minutes ago because the sun is about 8 light-minutes from Earth.
That was excellent. Thank you
Perhaps also worth pointing out that the speed of light is that exact speed, because light itself hits a speed limit.
As far as we know, light has no mass, so if it is accelerated in any way, it should immediately have infinite acceleration and therefore infinite speed (this is simplifying too much by using a classical physics formula, but basically it's like this: a = f/m = f/0 = ∞
). And well, light doesn't go at infinite speed, presumably because it hits that speed limit, which is somehow inherent to the universe.
That speed limit is referred to as the "speed of causality" and we assume it to apply to everything. That's also why other massless things happen to travel at the speed of causality/light, too, like for example gravitational waves. Well, and it would definitely also apply to that pole.
Here's a video of someone going into much more depth on this: https://www.pbs.org/video/pbs-space-time-speed-light-not-about-light/
Actually, the thing that applies to the pole is the speed of sound (of the pole material), which is the speed the atoms in the pole move at. Not even close to the speed of light.
Yeah, everyone else had already answered that, which felt like we're picking apart that specific thought experiment, even though there is actually a much more fundamental reason why it won't work.
Correct answer is here.
I think relativity demonstrates that light does have mass?
They might not have "rest mass" but they do have mass!
The eclipse experiment proved it, solar sails whilst hypothetical demonstrate it.
Relativistic mass is not helpful to our everyday understanding of mass, it's more helpful to discuss momentum, like the other commenter pointed out
always had this question as a kid
And then went, draw it out, and asked.
\
I applaud that (and the art), good for you.
(And the good people already provided answers.)
That would not work. Pushing an object is transmitting kinetic energy to it. The object will push back, and energy would not be distributed to the whole object at the same time.
If the object cannot be altered in any way, then the energy would not be transferred to it, and if it has enough plasticity to absorb the kinetic energy, it would be spread in a wave to the tip. A wave that would always be slower than light.
Now stop fooling around and give Ruyi Jingu Bang back to Sun Wukong.
I predict we'll have FTL travel before we can invent a stick that's "unfoldable".
A wooden stick is pretty much unfordable in an unaltered state Or a glass stick
Matter is made of atoms. Things are only truly rigid in the small scales we deal with usually.
Because the stick isn't infinitely rigid. If you push it at one end the other end doesn't immediately start moving. The time it takes, I think, is equal to the speed of sound inside that material. Ultimately the forces that bind atoms together and allow them to interact are limited by the speed of light.
I ran this by an engineer and they said the same thing
Huh....so we may fail to achieve faster than light (FTL) travel but we could probably manage faster than stick (FTS) travel
Easily. I imagine that most spacecraft are already traveling faster than the speed of stick. It's likely only a few thousand meters per second
What about the speed of the earth's rotation though, could that fuck up the stick holding?
It'll knock the moon and earth out of orbit!
Next, I suppose you'll want to know about the speed of dark 🤨
Damn it even on Lemmy I can't get to the comments before someone else has the samr idea as me ahaha
So folks have already explained the stick, but you're actually somewhat close to one of the ways you can sort of bend the rules of FTL, at least when it comes to a group of photons.
Instead of a stick, imagine a laser on earth pointed at one edge of the moon. Now suddenly shift the laser to the other side of the moon. What happens to the laser point on the moon's surface?
Well, it still takes light speed (1.3 seconds to the moon) for the movement to take effect, but once it starts, the "point" will "travel" to the other side faster than light. It's not the same photons; and if you could trace the path of the laser, you'd find that the photons space out so much that there are gaps like a dotted line; but if you had a set of sensors on each side of the moon set up to detect the laser, they would find that the time between the first and second sensor detecting the beam would be faster than what light speed would typically allow.
It's not exactly practical, and it's such an edge case that I doubt we can find a good way to use it, but yeah; FTL through arc lengths can kind of be a thing. At least if you tilt your head and squint funny at it.
With your example, nothing is “moving”.
Imagine a giant wave in the ocean that is almost lined up perfectly parallel to the shore. Imagine the angle that the wave is off by is astronomically small (0.0000000001 degrees off from parallel). Also imagine the shore line is astronomically long (millions of kilometers).
One end of the wave will crash the shore slightly before the other end of the wave at the opposite end of the shore. The difference in time between the two sides of the shore is also astronomically small (so small that not even light could reach the other end in time)
Now let me ask you: did the wave “crash” travel faster than the speed of light? Of course not. I think that is a similar analogy to the laser movement concept you described.
Edit: Fun thought experiment. Depending on where you are on the shore (which end you are closer to), you may see one end crash before the other end (one event happening before the other event). Have two people at different locations on the shore, once they meet up with each other, they might disagree on which end crashed first! And they would BOTH be correct! Relativity is fucking crazy
this isn't at all what this example depicts, here there is actual information transfer.
this depiction is actually just false, the light would send information faster than the stick, because in the stick information only travels as fast as speed of sound in the stick, which is why completely rigid objects don't exist
Sure, the time between detections is faster than the time it takes light to travel from one detector to the other. Nothing is actually traveling faster than light and no physical laws are broken.
You'd still be limited by light speed to transmit the information between the two locations to compare times or indicate they received a signal.
I'm not sure. The beam of light would bend as it travels to the moon, delaying the projected dot on the moons surface.
Just like it happens with a stream of water coming out of a hose. You point the hose in a new direction, but it won't get wet before the the time it takes the water to travel from the hose to the pointed location.
This is hard to truly eli5, so I'll have a go too, in case the others haven't cleared it up for you.
The spot on the moon that moves isn't a real thing, it's the effect of photons hitting the left side, then other photons hitting the right side. The 'reason' or 'cause' for those photons comes from earth very much at light speed. But the left side of the moon can't cause an effect in the right side, that fast. It just experiences a thing right before the right side experiences something similar.
Like if two cars drive from London to Manchester and Liverpool, arriving within seconds of each other. It doesn't mean you can drive from Manchester to Liverpool in seconds.
There's an SMBC I love on this: "The shadows of reality go as fast as they like." https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/superluminal
Bonus: IIRC, any two events that are too close in time for light to travel from one to the other, can be viewed from a different "inertial reference frame" (someone else moving fast and analysing things with the same physics) as being the other way round. I.e. the right observer could see the right hand side of the moon get lit up before the left hand side. But the chap on earth wiggling the laser pointer is still wiggling it slower than the speed of light, so this observer would still see the laser pointer move from left to right. How does that work?
The photons move from laser to moon and it takes time of light's speed. FTL is not possible in that case. Also the information is transmittes from earth to moon and not from one side of moon to other side of moon
I'm not a scientist, but when I asked the same question before they said, "compression."
Like, the stick would absorb the power of your push, and it would shrink (across its length) before the other end moved. When the other end does finally move, it's actually the compression reaching it.
Short version: forces applied to solid objects move at the speed of sound in that object.
Lets say your stick is made of steel. The speed of sound in steel is about 19,000 feet/second. Assuming you could push hard enough for the force to be felt on the other end, it'd take over 18 hours for your partner on Earth to feel your push from the moon.
Move a sheet up and down rapidly
You can see the wave travel across it
Because you put the apostrophe in the wrong place?
The speed of 'push' is effectivly the speed of sound in a medium. So your shove would be the same as propagating a soundwave through whatever that rod is made of.
Veritassium covers this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPsG8td7C5k&t=61s
Think of it like this. If our universe is a simulation, then the speed of light is the maximum speed at which information can propagate through reality. We know that for anything to move through space, it must move from one adjoining position to another, then another, then another, incrementally. Each one of those increments takes, at minimum, one 'tick' of the universe. That's one tick to increment each bit of information, that is, the position of something moving at light speed from position x,y,z to x+1,y,z. Light moves as fast as the universe allows; if there was a faster speed, light would be doing it, but it turns out that our universe's clock speed only supports speeds of up to 299,792,458 meters per second.
What you have here is sound. Motion propagates through material at the speed of sound in that material. That's part of the reason why moving large scale objects quickly gets weird.
Edit: to be clear, I am not making the case that we're in a simulation. I'm only trying to use computers to make it relatable.
This is actually a great example for why that stick must not exist.
You can also do this with a unbreakable stick and an unbreakable shorter tube. Throw the stick at a high velocity through the tube and it contracts for the point of view of the tube. Then close it shut. Now you have a stick that's longer than the tube fully contained in it.
The whole poll does not move as end entire unit instantaneously. You send a sort of shock-wave through the poll, when you push it from your end. That shockwave has a travel time that's much slower than light. I suspect that the speed of that shockwave probably proportional to the speed of sound in the material that the poll is made of.
Ok so since there's a bunch of science nerds on here and I'm sleep deprived I'm gonna ask my dumb ftl question.
If you're on a train and you walk towards the front of the train, your speed measured from outside of the train is the speed of the train (T) plus the speed of you walking (W).
So if there was a train inside of that train, and you walked inside of that, you'd go the speed of the outside train, plus the speed of the inside train, plus your own walking speed.
So what if we had a Russian nesting doll of trains, so that the inner most train was, from the outside, going as fast as light and you walked towards the front? Wouldn't you be going faster than light if you measured your speed from the outside?
Didn't come at me with how hard it would be to build a Russian nesting doll of super trains it's a hypothetical and I'm tired.
The idea that the velocity of a person walking forward on a train is simply the velocity of the train plus the velocity of the person walking with respect to the train is called “Galilean relativity”.
Einstein realized that Galilean relativity has a big problem if you take for granted the idea that the speed of light is the same for all observers, regardless of reference frame, and people had a lot of reasons at the time to suspect this to be true.
In particular, he imagined something like watching a train passing by him, but on board the train is a special clock which works by shooting a pulse of light at a mirror directly overhead which reflects back down and hits a sensor. Every time the light pulse hits the sensor, the clock ticks up by one and another light pulse is sent out. People usually call this the “light clock thought experiment” if you want to learn more about it.
Anyway, Einstein realized if he was watching the light clock as the train passed by him while he’s standing on the station, the path the light beam traces out will take the form of a zigzag. Meanwhile, for a person standing on the train, it will just be going straight up and down. If you know anything about triangles, you will realize that the zigzag path is longer than the straight up and down path. So if everyone observes the speed of light to be the same exact thing, it must be the case that it will take the light a longer amount of time to traverse the zigzag path. And so the person standing on the platform will see that clock ticking slower than the person on the train will. This phenomenon is called “time dilation”.
From this point, you can apply some simple trigonometry to figure out just how much slower things would be appearing to move on the train. And it turns out that the velocity the person watching the train observes the person walking on the train to have is not the velocity of the train plus the velocity of the person walking on the train. But rather, it’s something like that velocity, but divided by 1 + (train velocity)•(walking velocity)/c^2, where c is the speed of light (and this is called “Lorentzian relativity” if you want to read more about it).
It’s important to notice that since trains and walking come nowhere close to the speed of light, the value you’re adding to one is very small in these kinds of situations, and so what you’re left with is almost exactly the same thing you would get with Galilean relativity, which is why it still is useful and works. But when you want to consider the physics of objects that are moving much much faster, all of this is extremely important to take into account.
And lastly if you wanna read more about this stuff in general, this is all part of “the theory of special relativity” and there’s probably helpful YouTube videos covering every single thing that I’ve put in quotation marks.
Dang there goes my patent
Things get really unintuitive when you go near the speed of light. Einstein's "Special Relativity" is describing that. Watch a couple of videos on the topic. It's mindbending but seriously cool.
In short: The speed light is always constant FOR EVERY OBSERVER. That means, if you would hold a flashlight in a very fast moving train, the light would travel as the same speed for you as for a stationary person that is watching your flashlight from outside the train.
But how could that be? Aren't you "adding" the trains speed to your flashlight? So shouldn't the light in your train travel faster in your train? Or maybe slower? No. Light speed is always constant - but what is NOT constant is space and time. It is relative to the observer. Time and space can stretch/dilate to make up for what seems to be a paradox. E.g. your trains would shrink in length the faster you go. But it would look different to you than it does to an outside observer.
As I said, it's mindbending, but there are a couple of cool and simple videos on the internet to get a better grasp on the matter.
That's wack af
That's where time dilation will kick in
Relativity would prevent this. If the train moves at the speed of light, then nothing inside it will move because time will stop. The amount of trains inside trains doesn't really change much except the effect of time dilation (slowdown) on each train. You can't actually accelerate to the speed of light.
as a software engineer that watches too much youtube, this is the first time it’s clicked for me:
If the train moves at the speed of light, then nothing inside it will move because time will stop.
the pieces of information:
have never been concretely connected in my head, but this makes a lot of sense now: time moves slower (for you) the faster you travel BECAUSE that’s the thing that stops you from moving faster than the speed of light… AND that holds true from all perspectives because it’s like… a trade-off?
Because of relativistic effects, from your point of view on the train you would just walk forward. But you would notice a strange effect while the trains were accelerating: your atomically synchronized wristwatch the clock you can see out the window has slowed down and stopped counting time. So it seems that your journey to the front of the train takes no time at all.
From someone standing on the side of the tracks catching a glimpse of you and the train as you whizz by, the front of the train is moving at light speed. You're at the back of the train completely frozen still, unable to move forward because the front of the train is moving away at light speed.
Weird things happen when you're talking about the limits of physical reality.
your atomically synchronized wristwatch has slowed down and stopped counting time.
Wait, surely time would move at a normal speed within your own reference frame. The act of you walking to the front of the inner-most train you are in would be a normal occurence to you, but if you looked out of the window you would see a completely frozen scene.
Only once you measure time afterwards with an observer would you notice the gaping time difference.
Not a science nerd. But I would assume the inner trains would like to push forward, stealing some kinetic energy from the outer train because it pushes itself away from the outer train and making the outer train slower or even push back.
Putting it on the moon is just a distraction. It doesn't matter if the rod is 1m long or 100,000km.
Long winded video about it:
'Are solid objects really “solid”?' (go-to 7:30)
That was a really good video!
Thank you for sharing--that was a really neat demonstration, and I enjoyed seeing all the troubleshooting as well. Will definitely be subscribing and checking out more of their videos!
There's a bunch of these thought experiments that try to posit scenarios where C is violated.
Here's one I remember from uni involving scissors. Similar to what OP was thinking, but really really big scissors.
At this scale, the stick isn't as solid as your intuition would lead you to believe. Instead, you have to start thinking about the force at the atomic scale. The atoms in your hand have an outer shell of electrons which you use to impart a force to the electrons in the outer atoms of the stick on your end. That force needs to be transferred atom to atom inside the stick, much like a Newton's Cradle. Importantly, this transfer is not instantaneous, each "bump" takes time to propagate down the stick and will do so slower than the speed of light in a vacuum. It's basically a shockwave traveling down the length of the stick. The end result is that the light will get to the person on the other end before the sequence of sub-atomic bumps has the chance to get there.
Go find a 30' stick and let us know if you can point it at the moon.
This doesn't account for blinking.
If your friend blinks, they won't see the light, and thus would be unable to verify whether the method works or not.
But how does he know when to open his eyes? He can't keep them open forever. Say you flash the light once, and that's his signal to keep his eyes open. Okay, but how long do you wait before starting the experiment? If you do it immediately, he may not have enough time to react. If you wait too long, his eyes will dry out and he'll blink.
This is just not going to work. There are too many dependent variables.
Do you think it would be possible if you remove the astronauts eyelids? Would that enable faster than light communication?
You joke, but this is a real problem in computing Obligatory link to Tom Scott video.
Nah, I prefer using quantum spookiness for that. Send a steady stream of entangled particles to the other person on the moon first. Any time you do something to the particles on Earth, the ones on the Moon are affected also. The catch is that this disentangles them, so you have only a few limited uses. This is why you want a constant stream of them being entangled.
This wouldn't work, entangled particles don't work like that. They would be disentangled the moment you do anything to either particle of the entangled pair. The only time any information can be encoded onto entangled particles is when they're created.
The only time any information can be encoded onto entangled particles is when they’re created.
If that were the case, then we aren't really doing FTL communication, unless we manage to entangle them at a distance. No?
OIC, it's still useful if we want to make a secret key and send it somewhere. Then both sides can take a reading sometime in the future and they can then use whatever cluster of entangled particles they saw, as the symmetric key.
You also cannot choose the spins of entangled particles, they collapse randomly in either direction when interacted with, meaning you cannot send messages. If you can figure out how to directly influence the spin of generated subatomic particles then BAM you have FTL communication.
But you would be amazed how many obstacles the universe throws in front of you when you try to break the speed of causality. Faster than light communication isn't possible because it makes no sense when you understand it. It's like "getting answers faster than questions." It's nonsense.
Wouldn't that still be normal light speed communication from earth to two places on the moon, not FTL communication between two places on the moon?
How heavy would a stick of this size weigh?
We're supposing that you have an herculean strengh and that weight is not a problem
Weigh on Earth or on Moon?
EDIT: It's in Polish, but it's still a good video.