It can look dumb, but I always had this question as a kid, what physical principles would prevent this?
I don’t see this mentioned in any of the other comments: the repulsion between atoms that causes the movement to propagate through the stick is actually communicated via photons. So your push really generates the same kind of particles that your light torch is generating, and they travel at the same speed. Except in the stick it is slowed down by repeated absorption and excitation by the electrons of the atoms.
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.
Username checks out.
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, 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
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.
What about using c++ or rust?
That’ll anger the universe’s devs who will then bully you.
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.
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!
that makes sense, i forgot that pushing something is basically like creating a sound wave on it ^^’ thank you :)
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.
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
I ran this by an engineer and they said the same thing
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
Short version: the speed if sound is slower than light regardless of the material it passes through.
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 the force to reach the other end of the rod.
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.
The pole would basically be a space elevator. I suspect gravity and inertia would effectively keep you from moving the stick. Even if you could move it, you’d only be able to move it at a speed that would seem like it’s stationary. As such, the light would still be faster.
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.
You joke, but this is a real problem in computing Obligatory link to Tom Scott video.
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
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.
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 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.
That was excellent. Thank you
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.
Excellent write up.
You’re gonna want a powerful laser probably and ain’t no stick that big like not even fkn close not even if we tried so that’s why would’nt tbqh
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.
Long winded video about it:
‘Are solid objects really “solid”?’ (go-to 7:30)
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.
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.
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
