this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2025
487 points (93.7% liked)

Asklemmy

44934 readers
1141 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

It can look dumb, but I always had this question as a kid, what physical principles would prevent this?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 20 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 day ago (2 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Alright now eli5? Everything is jelly?

[–] billwashere 1 points 20 hours ago

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.

https://youtu.be/Vitf8YaVXhc

[–] AEsheron 1 points 21 hours ago

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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Everything soft and slow like your brain yes.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This is an excellently written response.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Not going to disagree with that, but you’re responding to somebody who obviously has no background in physics, and it strikes me as a reasonable balance between conceptual (β€œhand wavy”) and detailed enough.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I used to run physics labs at uni so I'd hope I was as alright teacher still. Never made it as a real physicist though ;_;

[–] TommySalami 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Well, it made me feel smart. So either you're a good teacher, and helped me put into words and solidify something I already understood more abstractly. Or you're a terrible teacher, and have led me further astray.

Pretty rough dichotomy there. I would not want to be an educator.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

[–] recentSloth43 30 points 1 day ago

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.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

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 754x10^6kg due to its enormous length. Now, if you tried to give it just a tiny acceleration of 0.01 m/sΒ² (barely noticeable movement), the required force would be:

F = (754Γ—10^6 ) Γ— (0.01) = 7.54Γ—10^6 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.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

[–] surph_ninja 5 points 1 day ago

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.

[–] BigBenis 8 points 1 day ago

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.

[–] BradleyUffner 38 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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.

[–] PieMePlenty 7 points 2 days ago (4 children)

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?

[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 days ago (2 children)

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.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago

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.

[–] LouNeko 4 points 1 day ago

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

...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...

[–] MeaanBeaan 7 points 1 day ago

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.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

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.

[–] [email protected] 55 points 2 days ago (1 children)

If your stick is unbreakable and unavoidable you have already broken laws of physics anyway

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago (2 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (3 children)

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.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 64 points 2 days ago (2 children)

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.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 78 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (9 children)

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.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] LovableSidekick 42 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (4 children)

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.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Unlearned9545 77 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 235 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (26 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 83 points 3 days ago (1 children)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 69 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

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.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (24 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

I enjoyed a lot of the discussion in the comments

[–] [email protected] 35 points 2 days ago

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

[–] [email protected] 86 points 3 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] rainerloeten 70 points 3 days ago (6 children)

You think its instantaneous because you never held such a long stick.

Speak for yourself! 😏

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] WoodScientist 123 points 3 days ago (11 children)

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.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] [email protected] 42 points 2 days ago (5 children)

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.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 days ago (1 children)

For anyone looking for other cool ideas or videos about speed of light etc

What Is The Speed of Dark? - Vsauce (13m:31s)

  • Cool older vsauce video going over shadows and light speed etc

The Faster-Than-Light Guillotine - Because Science (w/ Kyle Hill) (14m:19s)

  • Basically goes over the "FTL Scissor action" that a lot of people have covered but he does a good segment covering it.
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next β€Ί