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.
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 (“hand wavy”) and detailed enough.
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 ;_;
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.
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 = (754×10^6) × (0.01) = 7.54×10^6 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 interested in the net velocity.
Wikipedia isn’t a textbook. Don’t overcomplicate shit and mislead people because you’ve spent a few hours browsing particle physics articles stoned.
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 travel at the speed of light, will do it.
There was never any lower limit specified in my response because there is no need to go into that to disprove a theory about the upper limit being beyond a certain point. (Which makes that ironic statement of yours about the speed of sound-waves quite peculiar as it is mathematically and logically unrelated to what I wrote)
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
LOL!
Reduced to name calling.
Good try, shame you don’t have the chops (as the way you express yourself gave away very early on)
I don’t know why you are pretending to have physics knowledge when you very obviously do not have an education in it. What do you get out of pretending to be an expert on the internet? There’s no reward for it.
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.
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… 😅
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.
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.
NASA: “Hold my beaker.”
What if you had a crane?
Or a duck.
Or hope
🤘
For now
13 hours later Now?
Hold on, let me check. I don’t think so
deleted by creator
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
…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…
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
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.
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.
- 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
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!
There can’t be infinite deceleration,
I realise I should have been more specific.
Considering the pusher as a point object, deceleration of the pusher be infinite. Just another simplification so that you don’t have to calculate what would happen to all the speeds in between.
