It can look dumb, but I always had this question as a kid, what physical principles would prevent this?
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?
The only way to know for sure is by trying
Okay done i got his lids whos got the space gear and the impossible stick
You joke, but this is a real problem in computing Obligatory link to Tom Scott video.
How heavy would a stick of this size weigh?
Weigh on Earth or on Moon?
We’re supposing that you have an herculean strengh and that weight is not a problem
Matter is made of atoms. Things are only truly rigid in the small scales we deal with usually.
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.
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.
Excellent write up.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.
That was excellent. Thank you
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.
No, gravity is faster than light. If there was this lag, we wouldn’t have stable orbits exactly because of the lag you describe. Wave functions of photons also collapse faster than light when they hit absorbent material.
wave function (something that does not travel) collapses (something that does not move either) faster than light (themselves?)
this word soup does not make sense
I used wave function as a bad form of shorthand for the general properties of the photon, such as the theoretically infinitely extending magnetic and electric fields. Those associated fields stop existing when the photon is absorbed onto a screen. They collapse faster than light can travel. This doesn’t ruin much of modern theories, because there doesn’t seem to be a way to transfer usable information through this phenomenon.
I don’t think gravitational waves traveling at the speed of light is the same as the gravitational attraction being apparently felt faster than light travels. Similarly, electric attraction between + and - charges is different from electromagnetic waves being transmitted in the field. It’s not light that is “communicating” that attraction.
I don’t think gravitational waves traveling at the speed of light is the same as the gravitational attraction being apparently felt faster than light travels.
I don’t know how you would measure gravitational waves without measuring gravitational attraction.
It’s not light that is “communicating” that attraction.
Nobody said it was. The “speed of light” isn’t about “light”. Gravity propagates at the same speed, aka “c.”
This Reddit discussion on r/AskPhysics might help clear up your misconceptions. Notably:
Just to clarify: when people talk about the speed of gravity, they mean the speed at which changes propagate. It’s the answer to questions like: if I take the Sun and wiggle it around, how long does it take for the Earth to feel the varitation in the force of gravity? And the answer is that changes in gravity travel at the speed of light.
But that’s not what you’re asking about. Whenever you’re close to the Earth, gravity is always acting on you: it’s not waiting until you step off a cliff, like in the Coyote and the Roadrunner. The very instant your foot is no longer on the ground, gravity will start to move it downwards. The only detail is that it takes some time for it to build up an appreciable speed, and this is what allows us to do stuff like jump over pits: if you’re fast enough, gravity won’t be able to accelerate you enough - but gravity is still there.
I get the sense that you’re thinking about the second scenario when objecting to the concept that gravity travels at the speed of light.
I was definitely talking about the first scenario, as is mostly everyone else. I know not everyone admits gravity (gravitational attraction) might travel faster than light as in the “sun moving” thought experiment. I’m not confused, I’m discussing like everybody else. You linked an article about gravitational waves which must transmit through some sort of gravitational field and they might transmit at approximately c as predicted in general relativity. What I believe is that gravitational attraction, so the general effect of the field will be felt as if it acts almost instantly, and that does not contradict anything about the waves in that field. Because the waves in that field are not responsible for the attraction. This is similar to how photons do not mediate the magnetic attraction in magnets even though they are electromagnetic waves. The current theories (which you are pulling from) manage to mathematically explain that in our moving sun thought experiment, the gravitational force coming from the sun appears to “update” instantly as if it’s acting from it’s actual position without the lag, because of (to my understanding) the curvature of space-time. So I personally can’t fight that on mathematical grounds because that’s above my understanding. But in the end it doesn’t change much of anything to our discussion, because the force of gravity still updates “as if” it was mostly instantaneous and that’s the standard model. Meanwhile, gravitational waves do travel at c but are kind of unrelated to the continous force. They are merely fluctuations in that force. Please keep poking and challenging me at that, I’m still wrapping my head around it and will need better and better sources while I’m hyper focusing on it until I move on lol
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! 😏
Alas, the longer the stick is, the floppier it gets.
Is it instantaneous though?
Basically the speed of sound in that material
Probably wiggly wiggly
It depends on the person who’s holding it and pushing it. For me it takes at least three minutes!
Tbh I thought someone would make that joke when i wrote it lol
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.
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
That’s what he meant by we’ll use sticks on the other side
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.
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.
why wouldn’t this work
because bullets are faster than whatever the fuck speed stickman is achieving
and even bullets are slower than lightLong 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!
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.
Wow, TIL that the speed of sound has this equivalence
It’s also why rocket nozzles can’t be infinitely thin :)
I don’t get it. Care to explain?
There are multiple forces at work in a converging rocket nozzle:
- The exhaust is pushed outward faster since the hole is smaller, giving the rocket extra 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.
deleted by creator
Exactly
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
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
Damn, so that means no FTL communication for now… 😅
For now
13 hours later Now?
Hold on, let me check. I don’t think so
Hear me out… What about a metal stick?
🤘
Metal is a lot heavier than wood. You’d never be able to lift it to the moon.
What if you had a crane?
Or a duck.
Or hope
NASA: “Hold my beaker.”
But can you lift it from the moon? Gravity is a lot lower there.
Large if factual
You should make it out of feathers. Steel is heavier than feathers.
Are you saying that the person on the moon would feel a tap from the other end or the person would actually push the stick forward towards the man’s hand on the moon?
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
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.
