The informational paradox of rectilinear motion

AI Thread Summary
The discussion explores the informational paradox of rectilinear motion, questioning what happens to information about torsion when a body transitions from a curved path to a straight line. It asserts that while information is conserved, the torsion of a straight line is undefined, leading to a loss of information about the initial state’s torsion. This creates a contradiction with the principle of information conservation, as it suggests information can be irretrievably lost or created. The proposed solution involves a new postulate that every body moves along trajectories with well-defined curvature and torsion, including free bodies with constant curvature and torsion. This postulate aims to reconcile the paradox and align with existing principles of physics.
Abel Cavaşi
Messages
34
Reaction score
2
If the torsion of the straight line is undefined what happens with the information about the torsion?

It is known (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_no-deleting_theorem, http://van.physics.illinois.edu/qa/listing.php?id=24045) that the information conserved in a system can be nor created, neither destroyed.

Therefore, if a body is heading on a certain pathway, the information about the pathway’s curvature and torsion should remain unchanged, no matter the modifications the body is suffering.

Let’s assume then, in the beginning, that, under the influence of some forces, a body is firstly heading on a pathway that has its curvature and its torsion non-zero and well defined - a state we call “initial state”.

Then, following a certain process (for example, releasing the body), the body starts moving rectilineal, more exactly, on a straight line - a state we can call “final state”. The straight line has zero curvature, and the vanishing of the curvature could be informationally correlated with the intensity of the forces that lead to the initial state.

However, the problem is THE TORSION. The straight line’s torsion is impossible to be defined (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frenet–Serret_formulas#Special_cases). Therefore, the information about the initial state’s torsion is irrecoverable lost in the final state! But this data is contradictory with the principle of information's conservation.

Of course, the problem can be also reversed. It can be assumed that in the initial state, the body is moving rectilineal and then, in the final state, it starts moving on a curve with the torsion well defined. In this case, the information would be created out of nowhere, data that is again contradictory with the principle of information's conservation.

How can we solve this problem?
 
I believe the paradox can be solved if we add the following postulate in Physics:

- Every body in the Universe is moving on trajectories having the curvature and torsion well defined. In particular, free bodies are moving on trajectories having the curvature and torsion constant.

This postulate includes the current principle of inertia as a particular case. More exactly, the body's rest state corresponds to an infinite curvature, while a rectilinear
motion corresponds to a null curvature."

If something is unclear please let me know and I'll try to rephrase - I'm not a native English speaker so it might be that some paragraphs are not correctly expressed.
 
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