Notices
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: imo einstein was wrong or conservation of momentum is wrong

  1. #1 imo einstein was wrong or conservation of momentum is wrong 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    893
    i have two spinning weights 1 year light apart united by a weightless string, the system makes one revolution in half year

    if i want to send a message from weight a to weight b it will take one year to arrive

    but i do the following :i measure centrifugal force and when its 0 it will mean the instant message the string has been cut is been sent

    it took 0 seconds to arrive or momentum would not be conserved

    this means either faster than light info is posible or conservation of momentum is wrong


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,893
    Wow...if only all those scientists who spent years and years studying physics had ever bothered to think about two spinning objects connected by a string. I can't help but wonder why that scenario never occurred to anyone!


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    luxtpm, at what speed does the tension release wave travel along the string?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    893
    if the cut the string info goes at light speeds both weights will end with same vectors with which cons of momentum wont be acomplished

    yeah i wonder why nobody else thought of this obviety but i rather not to wonder dont want to go paranoid
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    130
    @luxtpm:
    Would you please write in a manner everyone can understand what you mean?
    I didn't manage to figure the meaning of your words out...
    I am.
    You can't deny it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Moderator Moderator Janus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,156
    The problem is that you are assuming starting conditions that already violate the rules of Relativity. You say that the string is weightless, by which I assume you mean massless. But in Relativity, massless objects can only have a velocity of c. Since different parts of the string must have different velocities, it can't be massless.

    Neither can the string be perfectly rigid. This means that the string must stretch under the tension of holding the balls in their paths. This tension stores energy. Once you cut the string at the first ball, the energy stored in the string starts to collapse the string. this energy and momentum travels along the string and is transfered to the other ball. IOW, if you take the momentum of the first ball and compare it to the momentum of the second ball + the momentum of the string (including that due to the string snapping back, you will find that it all balances out and momentum is conserved at all times after the string is cut.

    If you start with an impossible premise, you will get impossible results.
    "Men are apt to mistake the strength of their feelings for the strength of their argument.
    The heated mind resents the chill touch & relentless scrutiny of logic"-W.E. Gladstone


    Edit/Delete Message
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by luxtpm
    if the cut the string info goes at light speeds
    No it doesn't.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Transient
    Posts
    2,914
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    Quote Originally Posted by luxtpm
    if the cut the string info goes at light speeds
    No it doesn't.
    Yes it does. The forces that the two balls have on eachother via the string would travel down the string at light speed, informing each ball that there is another ball tugging on it. When the string is cut, the information of a lost connection would travel down each side of string at light speed to inform each ball that it wasn't being tugged on anymore.
    Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
    -Plato

    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope MagiMaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,440
    That information would only travel at light speed in some idealized situations. The pressure wave of a real string, being a massive object, wouldn't reach that speed.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Transient
    Posts
    2,914
    That's the real scenario though, and I replied to Ophi replying to his situation using a 'massless' string. In that case it would travel at light speeds. Or, a more realistic example (only slightly) assume that we can 'stretch' a proton to be one light year long. With that standard, the mass of the string is negligible to the system and the energy transfer from the cut would travel at nearly light speed, I'd hazard to say so near that our current measuring equipment wouldn't be able to tell the difference, nor the two balls spinning about each other.

    I am capable of being wrong though, as I am human and not the most well versed in this field, so if that's not right, by all means correct me.
    Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
    -Plato

    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope MagiMaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,440
    Well, either of those situations would be an idealized situation. If you were to try it with a real string, it'd be slower.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Moderator Moderator Janus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,156
    Quote Originally Posted by Arcane_Mathematician
    That's the real scenario though, and I replied to Ophi replying to his situation using a 'massless' string. In that case it would travel at light speeds. Or, a more realistic example (only slightly) assume that we can 'stretch' a proton to be one light year long. With that standard, the mass of the string is negligible to the system and the energy transfer from the cut would travel at nearly light speed, I'd hazard to say so near that our current measuring equipment wouldn't be able to tell the difference, nor the two balls spinning about each other.

    I am capable of being wrong though, as I am human and not the most well versed in this field, so if that's not right, by all means correct me.
    In such a situation the impulse travels at the speed of sound for the the medium.

    So what is the speed of sound for a proton?

    The speed of sound for a medium is found by



    Where C is the elastic modulus of the medium and p is the density.

    A proton is about 1.7e-15 meters across and has a mass of 1.67e-27 kg which gives it a density of 6.49189e17 kg/m

    Now let's take a stab at the elastic modulus:

    It is found by



    Stress is the force causing the deformation divided by the area of the cross section it is acting across.

    Strain is the relative deformation.

    We'll assume that the as the proton is stretched out is merely deforms in a a new shape, which gives us a "string" 1 light year long and with a radius of 2.94194e-31
    meters.

    Assuming the balls mass 10kg, and are moving at 0.1c we get a centripetal force of 1.9 Newtons, divided by the cross-section of the string gives us a stress of 6.99725e60 N/m

    We will assume that this is the force deforming the proton. (if it is removed, the proton will return to its natural shape.)

    The proton is deformed from 1.7e-15 m to 1 ly which gives a strain of 5.56518e30

    From this we get an elastic modulus of 1.25733e30 N/m

    Finally, we can find the speed of sound through our proton string, which turns out to be a little under 5% of c.
    "Men are apt to mistake the strength of their feelings for the strength of their argument.
    The heated mind resents the chill touch & relentless scrutiny of logic"-W.E. Gladstone


    Edit/Delete Message
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Exactly. I wasn't even considering a string composes of a 'particle', but a more realisitic string. My point was exactly as Janus has said in his opening sentence - the information would be transmitted at the speed of sound inwhatever material the string was composed of. It is by ignoring this fundamental that luxtpm has arrived at his mistaken ideas.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    893
    what i dont understand is that if the string is 1 light second long and it makes half revolution in one second when the signal cut the string arrives both weights will be going in the same direction
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope MagiMaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,440
    The string can't make 1 revolution per second if it's one lightsecond long. That would imply that the end of the string traveled over 3 lightseconds in one second.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •