The Speed of Light: If My Arms Were 10 Light Years Long

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the hypothetical scenario of having arms that are 10 light years long and the implications of waving them in relation to the speed of light. Participants explore concepts of rigidity, relativistic effects, and the transmission of motion and information in the context of special relativity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that if arms were perfectly rigid, waving them could imply motion faster than light, but this assumes a rigidity that does not exist in reality.
  • Others argue that since no part of a material object can exceed the speed of light, the arms must bend and cannot be considered perfectly rigid.
  • A participant suggests that if a wave were transmitted along the arm at light speed, an observer might perceive the arm as moving rigidly, despite the underlying physics preventing actual faster-than-light motion.
  • Another viewpoint discusses the infinite force required to move the tips of the arms as they approach the speed of light, questioning whether this creates an illusion of superluminal motion to a stationary observer.
  • Some participants introduce the concept of a rotating disk and the time delay in motion transmission, noting that while the disk may appear as a single object, it behaves differently at a subatomic level.
  • There is mention of the speed of sound as a limit for the transmission of force through a rigid object, contrasting it with the speed of light.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the nature of rigidity, the implications of special relativity, and the perception of motion. The discussion remains unresolved with no consensus on the interpretations of these concepts.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include assumptions about rigidity, the nature of forces in materials, and the complexities of relativistic effects that are not fully explored. The discussion also touches on the distinction between macroscopic and subatomic behavior of objects.

Physics1
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
If my arms were as long as 10 light years and I waved, wouldn't they be going faster than the speed of light?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
well the spiral "arms" of stars in the Milky Way galaxy are at least as long as 10 light years. and they be moving. do any component of those arms (the stars) move faster than c?
 
Physics1 said:
If my arms were as long as 10 light years and I waved, wouldn't they be going faster than the speed of light?
If your arm were perfectly rigid then what you said would be true. However since no part of your arm, which consists of matter, can actually travel at speeds v > c then it follows that your arm is not rigid. It must bend according to the principle of relativity.

Pete
 
pmb_phy said:
If your arm were perfectly rigid then what you said would be true. However since no part of your arm, which consists of matter, can actually travel at speeds v > c then it follows that your arm is not rigid. It must bend according to the principle of relativity.

Pete

However, if the wave was transmitted along your arm at the speed of light, then someone watching from the other end would see the whole arm move at once and might say it looked very rigid.
 
pmb_phy said:
If your arm were perfectly rigid then what you said would be true. However since no part of your arm, which consists of matter, can actually travel at speeds v > c then it follows that your arm is not rigid. It must bend according to the principle of relativity.

Pete
I think there is no problem if we were to assume a, theoretically, perfectly rigid (Born rigid) arm. Of course, the farther out, the closer the arm component will approach c, but it will never reach or surpass c.
For the simple reason that space is hyperbolic.
 
Last edited:
From what I know (which is not much), I think that once the ends of your arms approach c, the force required to push them becomes infinite. Therefore as you move your arms, you can exert as much force as you'd like, but you're never surpassing c.

Is this correct?But because the tips of your arms are experiencing less time, will this give the illusion that (to a stationary observer) his arm is moving faster than c? I really get confused when it comes to this part; I've only read a couple things on GR and still unsure about it.
 
Last edited:
From what I know (which is not much), I think that once the ends of your arms approach c, the force required to push them becomes infinite. Therefore as you move your arms, you can exert as much force as you'd like, but you're never surpassing c.

Yes, that's right. It's easier to image the more realistic scenario where you have a thin disc made from a rigid material with a huge radius. When you begin to rotate the center, a wave of shear-strain travels out from the middle like a ripple, at the speed of sound. The outer rim will only catch up after the time taken for sound to travel one radius. No relativistic effects yet.
If you're standing in the middle of the disc, the whole thing is stationary in your frame so eveything will look normal (?). To an observer who is not on the disc, and not moving relative to it's center, the disc will appear to deform
because some parts of it may be moving at relativistic speed in her frame.

But because the tips of your arms are experiencing less time, will this give the illusion that (to a stationary observer) his arm is moving faster than c? I really get confused when it comes to this part; I've only read a couple things on GR and still unsure about it.
We don't need GR for this, SR will do. Sometimes situations arise in astronomy where something appears to be superliminal, but I don't think this is one of them. But I could be wrong.
 
What's the problem with the following. I mean information can not be faster than c. But let's take a massiv disk with radius r and angular velocity 0. If I start giving it angular velocity from the centre then the outer site must also get speed, but in accordance with special relativity the time needed that the outer site is moving after the centre begun moving is: r/c. But why? I mean the disk is one thing.
 
Kruger said:
I mean the disk is one thing.
One has to realize that while the disk could be seen as one thing at a macroscopic level, it is not on a (sub) atomic level.
 
  • #10
Kruger said:
What's the problem with the following. I mean information can not be faster than c. But let's take a massiv disk with radius r and angular velocity 0. If I start giving it angular velocity from the centre then the outer site must also get speed, but in accordance with special relativity the time needed that the outer site is moving after the centre begun moving is: r/c. But why? I mean the disk is one thing.

What you call a "disk" is a solid object in which the atoms and molecules are assembled together via electromagnetic forces, the same type that is used to describe light! So these forces are "cousins" of light and thus, they obey the same speed limit.

Zz.
 
  • #11
I mean the disk is one thing.
If you had a long rigid stick ( about a mile long say) and you poked me in the back with it, it would be several seconds from the time you started pushing, to when I felt the push. The impulse travels through the rod at the speed of sound. This is established by theory and experiment.

[I hadn't seen Zz's post when I wrote this]
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 93 ·
4
Replies
93
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 120 ·
5
Replies
120
Views
9K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K