Speed of Force or 'Transfer of Momentum'

The galaxies are not traveling close to the speed of light. There are galaxies that have a recession velocity that exceeds the speed of light, all of those galaxies are traveling through space, some of those galaxies are traveling towards us even though the recession velocity is > c. There is no travel faster than light, if there is a galaxy that has a recession velocity > c, that does not mean it is traveling anywhere, someone on that far distant galaxy would say our milkyway galaxy has a recession velocity > c, do you think we are experiencing FTL travel now?

This is so typical of you, you wouldn't recognize real science if it hit you in the forehead. Why do you think that nobody knows who discovered that a energy is transfered through a solid at the speed of sound? If you don't know then nobody knows? How odd...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Um, you really expose your self to ridicule with comments like this. When designing structures it is important to take into account how energy is transfered through the construction materials. How energy is transmitted through a material is quite a bit older than the internet! This is just pitiful...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I suppose that in the case of a Newton's cradle there is only finite jerk.

As to whether infinite jerk can possibly exist, we must wait till we encounter such a thing experimentally. In the meantime, let's just continue with the commonly held principle of not dealing with infinite quantities.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I'm fine with that, but there is still further room for problems, such as whether it is required to occur at one point in space and time. Generally I think it is and that's part of the problem in this thread: if you zoom out, what looks like a single point in spacetime actually isn't.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

We have ample experimental evidence to form a pretty solid theory that it is not possible.

 

I'm starting to believe that Prof. Layman is actually a pretty good troll.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

What sort of experimental evidence? Some examples?

 

'Action' and 'Reaction' do not happen at the same time, at the same location.

So considering the definition of the term 'event' as: "a thing that happens in a particular time and at a particular location", it can be said that 'action' and 'reaction' are two different events.

 

As said, this seems typical of you. You don't know so you assume it isn't worth knowing. The notion of the end of an object only being able to react once 'sound' has propagated through it is a centuries old concept. It was known centuries ago that if something has infinite speed of sound then it cannot support wave dynamics because the waves are the propagation of said effects through a material.

This is particularly manifest in a concept pertaining to special relativity (remember, its that thing you claimed to know more about than Einstein), in that a perfectly rigid object is contradictory to the notion of special relativity since it would mean instantaneous information transmission. This is known as Born rigidity and dates back to the 1900s (ie pre-1910).

You constantly give excuses to yourself about why it is okay you don't know something, that it either isn't known or isn't worth knowing. Each time you're shown to be mistaken. Any rational person would have realised that they should re-evaluate their mistaken belief of competency in science yet you seem to continue with your rose tinted view of yourself. There are few things which really push my buttons but deliberate wilful ignorance is one of them and you have it in spades.

 

We are not talking about spacetime or GR here. Its simply Newtonian physics here.

 

So what is your point?

 

Any high speed collision or other dynamic analysis. This sort of thing is done by attaching load cells and strain gauges and doing high speed data acquisition. You can also measures the acceleration, jerk or speed with a high speed camera. Heck, mythbusters does that!

 

There is no such distinction required here. It doesn't matter if space and time are connected or not and I said it both ways. What matters if an event is a single point in both space and time.

 

As a side note to alphanumeric's point, there are a lot of high school and college experiments available with a Google for measuring the speed of sound in objects and air. Most use the standing wave method you described, but I figured that would be over the Prof's head. I've only seen my method applied to air, not objects in experiments. But it should be more believable because it is simpler.

 

That's quite a claim! How do you reconcile that with Newton's Third Law as quoted earlier? Are you claiming it is wrong? Do you have a source or did you just decide that yourself?

 

My point is that, there is some 'time-delay' between an action and its reaction.

As action and reaction happens to two different masses, they are different events.

In addition to being different events, they are not simultaneous either.

 

Newton's Third Law is perfect. I am not claiming it is wrong. I am only saying that, there is some 'time-delay' between an action and its 'reaction'.

My evidence is the 'events' happening with "Newton's Cradle".

 

. You should reread the quote because your claim is a near exact mirror of it.

What events are those? And so also this means you decided it for yourself rather than learning it from a trusted source. You might as well be a clone of Prof. Layman! That is an ineffective way to learn.

Let's put up or shut up though: I provided a source. Now it is your turn to do the same. Provide a trusted source that says action and reaction are separate events, not happening at the same time and/or place.

 

See here.

Consider this quote

Do you think here action and reaction are happening at the same time?

 

hansda, just listen up will you? there is no reason for the initial ball to bounce back. the transfer of momentum to the final ball takes some time because there are three balls in between and all the balls are elastic to some degree.

In Newton's concept of universal time, action and reaction happen at the same time. In a closed system that obey's Newton's 3rd Law, this means that the net force within the system at any point in time is zero . Force is dp/dt, and dp/dt against t is always zero. This means that p against t is a constant. The net momentum remains the same at any point in time. The conservation of momentum.

Now I shall go back to sleep. lol

 

Time-Delay between action and reaction, does not oppose 'conservation of momentum' or 'conservation of energy'.