Minimum speed of interaction of matter

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the concept of a minimum speed of interaction for matter, questioning whether such a speed exists in the universe. It highlights that while the speed of light is the maximum attainable speed, light does not accelerate to this speed but exists at it in a vacuum. Participants note that there is always a reference frame where any object can be considered at rest, implying there is no absolute minimum speed. The idea of matter taking in energy without moving before suddenly accelerating is considered unconventional and potentially "cranky." The conversation emphasizes the complexities of speed and reference frames in physics.
boit
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
hi physicists, i have a gnawing question that could be put to rest with experiment but i lack the tools and challenged in ideas. we all know that the speed of light in vacuum is the maximum that can be attained in the universe. also light does not accelerate to that speed, it just begin to exist at that speed in vacuum. now my to question: is there a minimum speed in the universe? i just begun to think that at very short distances, say nano metres range acceleration is never constant. like matter takes in energy without moving for a nano second or so then instantly move at a speed like say ten nano metres per second. what do you guy think? i could give a longer statement but am using a phone.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There is always a reference frame where whatever you are looking at is at rest, so there is no minimum speed.
 
I've just finished reading the guidelines and i can't tell if I've been politely warned. I guess it is cranky to imagine anything starting at zero relative speed suddenly attaining a subluminal speed in no time.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top