Unraveling the Mysteries of Perfectly Rotating Spheres in a Vacuum

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter dst
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Smooth Sphere
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of a perfectly rotating sphere in a vacuum, exploring the implications of its rotational symmetry and the challenges of detecting its rotation. Participants consider various scenarios, including the sphere's mass properties, the effects of charge, and the implications of quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question how one could determine if a perfectly symmetrical sphere is rotating, especially in a vacuum with no external reference points.
  • One viewpoint suggests that if the sphere is massless, it cannot rotate, as all parts would need to travel at the speed of light.
  • Another participant proposes using a lightweight object attached to the sphere to detect rotation through acceleration, but raises concerns about the feasibility of attaching anything to a perfectly smooth sphere.
  • There is a suggestion that if the sphere were charged, it could produce a magnetic field, making rotation easier to detect through induced voltage in a coil.
  • Some participants argue that a light source and measuring tools are necessary to observe the sphere, proposing that a Doppler shift in light reflecting off the sphere could indicate rotation.
  • One participant mentions that X-ray diffraction/reflection might be affected by the sphere's velocity, suggesting it could be a more reliable method of detection than visible light.
  • Another viewpoint emphasizes the need for an infinitely accurate spectrometer to measure any potential Doppler shifts.
  • There is a discussion about adding conditions that restrict affecting the sphere's rotational symmetry, raising questions about the nature of reference frames and the implications of quantum mechanics on the concept of rotation.
  • One participant brings up Mach's principle and Newton's bucket as relevant philosophical concepts related to the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the nature of rotation and detection methods, with no consensus reached. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of rotational symmetry and the feasibility of detecting rotation in a vacuum.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include assumptions about the sphere's properties, the necessity of external reference points, and the unresolved nature of how to measure rotation without affecting the sphere's symmetry.

dst
Messages
379
Reaction score
0
Is rotating with whatever angular velocity we want in a vacuum, it and you being the only objects around (assume no intrinsic properties like charge/mass).

How do you tell that it's doing so? And if it has perfect rotational symmetry, does it even make sense to say that it's rotating?

This has been gnawing at me for a few months but I never thought about asking.

Any ideas? What if it has charge or mass? Could you apply any studies of say, the lens-thirring effect to deduce anything useful? I am baffled.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
If the sphere is really massless, then it can only travel with the speed of light. All of it's parts must also be massless and travel with c, so it can't rotate.

Let's assume it has a mass. I would try to attach a light weigt to the surface of the sphere with a spring. If the sphere is rotating, then the weigth is accelerating and the spring will extend.

But is it possible to attach something to a perfectly smooth sphere? I think not: it must be rough at least on atomic level, otherwise it can rotate without changing energy of any bond.
In this case we should carefully break the sphere into pieces without adding momentum to pieces.The pieces will fly away from each other if the sphere was rotating.
If the sphere would be charged, determining rotation would be easier, because it would produce magnetic field. It would also feel other magnetic fields: a homogeneous mag. field would cause precession (similary as with electron), which could be detected by measuring induced voltage in a coil.
An electron is in fact pretty similar to a charged perfect sphere (except that it's radious is unknown or zero).
 
Last edited:
This is a bad gedanken experiment- clearly, there has to be other things in the universe, such as a light source to see the sphere. And measuring tools?

So, one way would be to look for a doppler shift off the light reflecting from the sphere. And as you move around the sphere, the doppler shift would change as you approach the axis of rotation.
 
You can have whatever you want. As long as the sphere stays a perfect sphere. What I'm getting at is perfect rotational symmetry, not necessarily with a sphere. How does it work?
 
Allow the sphere to split down the centre. Cut instantly in 2 halves by a laser beam

two halves will fall apart if was rotating/spinning, and they fall away from each other at constant velocity
They' ll still be spinning as they fall away into outer space.

two halves stay side by side if its not rotating/spinning
 
Last edited:
Andy Resnick said:
This is a bad gedanken experiment- clearly, there has to be other things in the universe, such as a light source to see the sphere. And measuring tools?

So, one way would be to look for a doppler shift off the light reflecting from the sphere. And as you move around the sphere, the doppler shift would change as you approach the axis of rotation.

I don't think there would be a Doppler shift for visible radiation. But X-ray diffraction/reflection should be affected, for sufficiently high velocities, I would think.
 
There's always a doppler shift, regardless of the wavelength and velocity. The trick is in measuring it. Since the OP said I could have whatever I want, I want a infinitely accurate and precise spectrometer :)
 
Would that work?

How about if we add another condition, you can't do anything to affect the rotational symmetry of the sphere itself? If you were restricted to just the space around it.

Also, does this count as a "preferred" reference frame? Anyway, in what ways would such a sphere be different from one that doesn't rotate? According to QM particles are indistnguishable (no way to say "this or that" particle) so again, can there actually be rotation?
 
Are you thinking (or have your thought about) about Mach's principle? Newton's bucket?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 264 ·
9
Replies
264
Views
24K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
12K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 85 ·
3
Replies
85
Views
13K
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K