this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2025
520 points (94.5% liked)

Asklemmy

46703 readers
821 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

It can look dumb, but I always had this question as a kid, what physical principles would prevent this?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] tkk13909@sopuli.xyz 247 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

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.

[โ€“] Metostopholes@midwest.social 83 points 1 month ago (1 children)

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.

[โ€“] tkk13909@sopuli.xyz 28 points 1 month ago

Oh right. I'll edit my comment

[โ€“] ech@lemm.ee 70 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

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.

[โ€“] nef@slrpnk.net 9 points 1 month ago

AlphaPhoenix is definitely one of the best scientists on YouTube, that video is good.

[โ€“] 0ops@lemm.ee 7 points 1 month ago

Cool vid, thanks for sharing

[โ€“] TheGuyTM3@lemmy.ml 37 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Damn, so that means no FTL communication for now... ๐Ÿ˜…

[โ€“] sbv@sh.itjust.works 30 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Hear me out... What about a metal stick?

[โ€“] DemBoSain@midwest.social 22 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Metal is a lot heavier than wood. You'd never be able to lift it to the moon.

[โ€“] ChanchoManco@lemm.ee 17 points 1 month ago (1 children)

But can you lift it from the moon? Gravity is a lot lower there.

Large if factual

[โ€“] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

You should make it out of feathers. Steel is heavier than feathers.

[โ€“] sbv@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[โ€“] ech@lemm.ee 7 points 1 month ago

NASA: "Hold my beaker."

[โ€“] Klear@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago
[โ€“] tkk13909@sopuli.xyz 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[โ€“] racketlauncher831@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[โ€“] tkk13909@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 month ago

Hold on, let me check. I don't think so

[โ€“] anus@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Wow, TIL that the speed of sound has this equivalence

[โ€“] Azzu@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

It's also why rocket nozzles can't be infinitely thin :)

[โ€“] superkret@feddit.org 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I don't get it. Care to explain?

[โ€“] Azzu@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

There are multiple forces at work in a converging rocket nozzle:

  1. The exhaust is pushed outward faster since the hole is smaller, giving the rocket extra thrust
  2. 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.