Why would'nt this work?
-
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 which 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 there's some delay since part of the movement of that wave is actual atoms moving and atoms have mass so they can't travel as fast as the speed of light).
In normal day to day life the rods are far to short for us to notice the delay between the pushing the rod on one end and the rod pushing something on the other end.
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.
-
I don't get it. Care to explain?
There are multiple forces at work in a rocket nozzle:
- The exhaust is pushed outward, giving the rocket thrust
- The exhaust hits the wall of the nozzle as it gets thinner, braking the rocket
These two effectively cancel out, which is why the actual effect of making the nozzle thinner/converge is that it increases the back pressure within the engine (constricted space, smaller hole), essentially (idk how) increasing the efficiency of the fuel burning.
However, when the nozzle gets too thin, the exhaust becomes faster than its speed of sound. Since the pressure travels at the speed of sound, it can now not actually get back into the engine anymore. So that's the limit of how thin you can make the nozzle. The pressure has to get back into the engine to have its effect, so you can't make the exhaust travel faster than its speed of sound.
If any of this sounds wrong to anyone, let me know, I'm not an expert in this.
-
It can look dumb, but I always had this question as a kid, what physical principles would prevent this?
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.
-
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 how do you think the information that an electrically charged particle is moving reaches other electrically charged particles...
-
And how do you think the information that an electrically charged particle is moving reaches other electrically charged particles...
My mistake, that's why sound travels at the speed of light.
It's just not useful to talk about this at the level of the standard model. We are interested in the bulk behaviour of condensed matter, the fact of the matter is that you will not be able to tell that the other end of the stick has been touched until the pressure wave reaches the end. It doesn't matter if individual force carriers are moving at the speed of light because they are not moving in a single straight line. You are interest in the net velocity.
-
I get it. Elasticity isn't something you think about in the every day so it all seems rigid.
Exactly. At the atomic level solid matter acts a lot like jello. It also helps explain why things tend to break if you push or pull on them at rates that exceed the speed of sound in that material.
-
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.
-
My mistake, that's why sound travels at the speed of light.
It's just not useful to talk about this at the level of the standard model. We are interested in the bulk behaviour of condensed matter, the fact of the matter is that you will not be able to tell that the other end of the stick has been touched until the pressure wave reaches the end. It doesn't matter if individual force carriers are moving at the speed of light because they are not moving in a single straight line. You are interest in the net velocity.
I very explicitly said the whole thing is slower than the speed of light (much slower even) and even pointed out why: at the most basic of levels, the way charged particles push each other without contact is the electromagnetic force, meaning photons, but the actual particles still have to move and unlike photons they do have mass so the result is way slower than the speed of light.
To disprove the idea that a push on a solid object can travel faster than the speed of light (which is what the OP put forward), pointing out that at its most basic level the whole thing relies on actually photons which traveling at the speed of light, will do it.
Going down into the complexity of the actual process, whilst interesting, isn't going to answer the OPs question in an accessible and reasonably short manner using language that most people can understand.
-
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?
-
I very explicitly said the whole thing is slower than the speed of light (much slower even) and even pointed out why: at the most basic of levels, the way charged particles push each other without contact is the electromagnetic force, meaning photons, but the actual particles still have to move and unlike photons they do have mass so the result is way slower than the speed of light.
To disprove the idea that a push on a solid object can travel faster than the speed of light (which is what the OP put forward), pointing out that at its most basic level the whole thing relies on actually photons which traveling at the speed of light, will do it.
Going down into the complexity of the actual process, whilst interesting, isn't going to answer the OPs question in an accessible and reasonably short manner using language that most people can understand.
- Aceticon BcS Applied Bullshit
-
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 87% of the speed of light, length compression is about 50%. So if you are carrying a pole 20 meters long and you run by 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.
This is a nice example that also makes me think more questions.
- Will the hole punching be forward or backward?
- Assuming infinite deceleration, for an observer on the other end of the barn, will the barn be punched through, before or after the pole-pusher has stopped?
- For the pole-pusher, will the barn be punched through, before or after it has stopped?
Gets more interesting
-
But.. But.. The stick is unfoldable!
You said unfoldable not non-compressible. Your fault.
-
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 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.
-
It can look dumb, but I always had this question as a kid, what physical principles would prevent this?
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.
-
It can look dumb, but I always had this question as a kid, what physical principles would prevent this?
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.
-
It can look dumb, but I always had this question as a kid, what physical principles would prevent this?
The issue is, that kind of stick wouldn't even exist. You'd have better luck with between some dwarf planet and its satellite, since the stick would break under its mere weight.
-
It can look dumb, but I always had this question as a kid, what physical principles would prevent this?
...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...
-
The issue is, that kind of stick wouldn't even exist. You'd have better luck with between some dwarf planet and its satellite, since the stick would break under its mere weight.
It's a thought experiment. Of course such a stick wouldn't exist. OP's question is what laws of physics prevent this theoretical scenario from working.
-
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.
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.
-
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 87% of the speed of light, length compression is about 50%. So if you are carrying a pole 20 meters long and you run by 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.
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.)
