| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Andrew B. Park" |
| Date: |
13 Jul 2004 09:11:12 PM |
| Object: |
Re: If NOT a reactionless drive, will it work? |
This thought experiment looks flawed--it is a contradiction within
itself, just like the early theory of atoms (which lets one law of
physics, namely Coulomb's law, but ignores another law that says an
accelerating charge radiates EM radiation).
Having thought about what you wrote for a day or two,
I've come to the conclusion that REGARDLESS of whether
or not I remember that a lot of nitpicky folks are here,
that will not change their nitpickiness. So, whatever
I write, no matter how innocuous, may be flamed-upon.
So, I might as well post some of the meat of the main
essay, and see what happens:
-----------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------
THOUGHT-EXPERIMENT:
Consider an old-fashioned battering ram. This is
basically a big tree trunk with a lot of handles
attached. Suspended from a framework, a gang of guys
divides into two groups, one on each side of the tree
trunk, then grabs it up by the handles, and moves
it to a door that needs to be battered. OK now,
let's imagine a modest experiment involving a very
special battering ram, not too thick, but so long
that it has two thousand handles, needing a thousand
guys on each side of the thing, and so tough that not
even Superman can break it. --Oh, and we also need
Superman for this thought-experiment.
So, this is one unrealistic assumption--a battering ram that is so
tough that it can't be broken--and since you didn't give anything like
Young's modulus, I suppose it's "rigid," too, isn't it? By itself, it's
not too unreasonable--it can be a good assumption, just like massless
pulleys and frictionless surface, as well as so called "free fall" on
earth.
Due to the length of this battering ram, and the
speed of sound, we first need to rig up a speaker
system, say, every three meters. Now all the men
can hear the commands to move the battering ram at
pretty much the same time, and can apply their
efforts pretty much in unison. For purposes of
this thought-experiment, we assume they DO apply
their efforts in unison.
OK, Superman, please stand near that end of the
battering ram. All the rest of you guys, here's
what we want you to do: When you hear the word
"Forth", you will each apply a short, sharp, jerk
to your battering ram handle, toward Superman, and
then let it coast. Superman, let it coast toward
you until you hear the word "Back" -- then apply a
powerful force to that end of the battering ram,
to push it back. That's all. We just want a
simple oscillation, with equal-magnitude forces
being applied, pushing it forth and back. Only
the WAY those forces are applied will be different
...get ready!
For the sake of simplicity, let's assume that when
Superman applies his Super force to the end of the
battering ram, it takes exactly one whole second
for that mechanical force, moving at the speed of
sound inside the battering ram, to reach the far
end. Also, we are going to say, "Forth! Back!
Forth! Back!..." at the rate of four words per
second. Physicists, what IS the Equation of
Motion for the battering ram?
-------------------------------------------
Moving at the speed of sound inside the battering ram, eh? Now, tell
me, do you have slightest idea of what the speed of sound inside the
battering ram is? By your assumption (or the way I interpreted
it--please give the required information (i.e. property of the
material) if my interpretation is incorrect) the ram is very rigid.
That lets us assume one important constant.
Well, my physics book has that the speed of longitudinal wave (which is
what sound wave is... well... I think--I know that it's the case in
air, but I'm not too sure about a solid) in a solid rod is, v =
sqrt(Y/rho), where Y is Young's modulus and rho is the density of the
material. Since we are not dealing with a blackhole, we can assume that
the density is some reasonable, finite number. Well, Young's modulus,
as we all know, is stress/strain. Stress is proportional to the force
applied on the rod (er, normal to cross section) and strain is
proportional to the change in length of the rod... do you see the
problem you just ran into?
Since the rod is rigid, strain approaches 0, and Young's modulus
approaches infinity. So, since rho is finite, v_sound approaches
infinity, and we know that it cannot be true--because of the theory of
special relativity. So, we need relativistic corrections on the speed
of sound.
But... as soon as we start considering relativistic effect, your whole
scenario breaks apart--even if you put speakers everywhere possible,
the fastest speed sound signal can travel through the wires is the
speed of light--so, in that approximation limit, your man will not be
pushing the rod in unison (and you should know, that, in theory of
relativity, "unison" has not much meaning... as there is nothing that
is "simultaneous").
So, here is my answer for "equation of motion for the battering ram":
For the given scenario, there can't be an equation of motion for the
battering ram, as (if I understood correctly) the author intends no
upper limit on the amount of impulse allowed on the battering ram (as
is clear in his assertion that the battering ram cannot be broken)
while stipulating that the mechanical force can "only" travel at the
speed of sound, which, following from his assertions, is infinite.
(And... if we are going to start approximating the battering ram as
some sort of "super spring," a spring (so... non-rigid assumption in
effect now.. allowing speed of sound to be finite in the "rod") with
infinite elastic range, then I'm afraid it's outside my expertise--as I
do not believe it will be a SHM any longer--I'll need a few more
classes on advanced mechanics before I tackle that.) So, this is a
poorly thought out scenario (specifically, it is a scenario where the
theories, assumptions, and approximations are taken out of their valid
range), and whoever worries too much over this scenario is, well, not
spending enough time in studying physics and wasting too much time on
some sort of modern alchemy (that is, trying to break the conservation
law of momentum).
Best wishes,
Andrew
.
|
|
| User: "vernonner3voltazim" |
|
| Title: Re: If NOT a reactionless drive, will it work? |
14 Jul 2004 11:42:19 AM |
|
|
"Andrew B. Park" <novakyu@yahoo.com> wrote:
This thought experiment looks flawed--it is a contradiction
within itself, just like the early theory of atoms (which
lets one law of physics, namely Coulomb's law, but ignores
another law that says an accelerating charge radiates EM
radiation).
Thanks for the analysis. I will try to clarify the
issues below.
-----------------------------------------------------
THOUGHT-EXPERIMENT:
Consider an old-fashioned battering ram. This is
basically a big tree trunk with a lot of handles
attached. Suspended from a framework, a gang of guys
divides into two groups, one on each side of the tree
trunk, then grabs it up by the handles, and moves
it to a door that needs to be battered. OK now,
let's imagine a modest experiment involving a very
special battering ram, not too thick, but so long
that it has two thousand handles, needing a thousand
guys on each side of the thing, and so tough that not
even Superman can break it. --Oh, and we also need
Superman for this thought-experiment.
So, this is one unrealistic assumption--a battering ram
that is so tough that it can't be broken--and since you
didn't give anything like Young's modulus, I suppose it's
"rigid," too, isn't it? By itself, it's not too
unreasonable--it can be a good assumption, just like
massless pulleys and frictionless surface, as well as so
called "free fall" on earth.
Sorry, "tough" is all I wanted. I know full well
that rigidity is associated with the speed of sound
in a material. But toughness is a different property.
The experiment is such that without a tough material
in the battering ram, IT will break. So, pretend it
won't break, and then just concentrate on its overall
motion....transverse vibrations are an acceptable
part of the overall motion, but they don't necessarily
particularly affect overall longitudinal motion of the
battering ram -- unless, of course, the Equation of
Motion indicates that they DO have a significant effect!
Due to the length of this battering ram, and the
speed of sound, we first need to rig up a speaker
system, say, every three meters. Now all the men
can hear the commands to move the battering ram at
pretty much the same time, and can apply their
efforts pretty much in unison. For purposes of
this thought-experiment, we assume they DO apply
their efforts in unison.
OK, Superman, please stand near that end of the
battering ram. All the rest of you guys, here's
what we want you to do: When you hear the word
"Forth", you will each apply a short, sharp, jerk
to your battering ram handle, toward Superman, and
then let it coast. Superman, let it coast toward
you until you hear the word "Back" -- then apply a
powerful force to that end of the battering ram,
to push it back. That's all. We just want a
simple oscillation, with equal-magnitude forces
being applied, pushing it forth and back. Only
the WAY those forces are applied will be different
...get ready!
For the sake of simplicity, let's assume that when
Superman applies his Super force to the end of the
battering ram, it takes exactly one whole second
for that mechanical force, moving at the speed of
sound inside the battering ram, to reach the far
end. Also, we are going to say, "Forth! Back!
Forth! Back!..." at the rate of four words per
second. Physicists, what IS the Equation of
Motion for the battering ram?
-------------------------------------------
Moving at the speed of sound inside the battering ram,
eh? Now, tell me, do you have slightest idea of what
the speed of sound inside the battering ram is?
Actually, I do know that for many solid substances,
the speed of sound in the material is on the order of
a thousand meters per second (steel is 5000 or so, I've
read). The more rigid, the faster. So, if we chose,
for example, 2000m/sec for our tough battering ram,
then that would be 2km long, for an impulse applied
at one end to reach the other in 1 second -- and the
1000 men on each side would be spaced 2m apart. Also,
remember it was specified as being "not too thick",
which was to ensure the fraction of battering-ram mass
to be "impulsed" by each man is not excessive. The
diameter of your leg, maybe.
Is that so unreasonable?
By your assumption (or the way I interpreted it--
please give the required information (i.e. property
of the material) if my interpretation is incorrect)
the ram is very rigid. That lets us assume one
important constant.
Well, my physics book has that the speed of
longitudinal wave (which is what sound wave is...
well... I think--I know that it's the case in air,
but I'm not too sure about a solid) in a solid rod
is, v = sqrt(Y/rho), where Y is Young's modulus and
rho is the density of the material. Since we are
not dealing with a blackhole, we can assume that
the density is some reasonable, finite number.
Well, Young's modulus, as we all know, is
stress/strain. Stress is proportional to the
force applied on the rod (er, normal to cross
section) and strain is proportional to the change
in length of the rod... do you see the problem you
just ran into?
It's not so bad as that. For example, the Air Force
found out in the 1950s, building ejection seats for
jets, that, under high-jerk conditions (where "jerk"
is rate-of-change-of-acceleration), stress is actually
NOT proportional to strain. The proportionality
only holds for steady-acceleration conditions and
minimal jerks. The proof was that EVERY TIME they
designed certain parts that were required to withstand
loads that were computed using the proportionality,
the parts broke. Keep in mind that the Air Force had
a vested interest in light-weight parts that were only
as strong as they needed to be. Those ejection-seat
parts had to be tougher and heavier, to withstand the
ACTUAL loads. --Of course THAT explains why I wanted
a tough battering ram! Because I know that Super
jerks are going to be happening to it!
--------------
<Digression>: The main thing that I have been wanting
people here to read, http://www.nemitz.net/vernon/artrr.rtf
includes this reference at its end:
"Detesters, Phasers, and Dean Drives" by G. Harry Stine,
"ANALOG Science Fiction/Science Fact", June 1976
That science article was written by a guy who was on
the ejection-seat design-and-testing team. </Digression>
--------------
Since the rod is rigid, strain approaches 0, and
Young's modulus approaches infinity. So, since rho
is finite, v_sound approaches infinity, and we
know that it cannot be true--because of the theory
of special relativity. So, we need relativistic
corrections on the speed of sound.
Yes, I do understand how imperfect assumptions lead
to a quagmire.
But... as soon as we start considering relativistic
effect, your whole scenario breaks apart--even if
you put speakers everywhere possible, the fastest
speed sound signal can travel through the wires is
the speed of light--so, in that approximation
limit, your man will not be pushing the rod in
unison (and you should know, that, in theory of
relativity, "unison" has not much meaning... as
there is nothing that is "simultaneous").
I am aware of the problem of simultaneouty.
Sometimes I think it is overhyped. Consider a single
microphone that leads to a powerful amplifier. From
that amplifier are HUNDREDS of equal-length wires,
each of which feeds one of the speakers along the
2Km battering ram. Yes, I know this means a lot of
loose wire on the ground, where the speakers are
physically close to the amplifier. The point is,
the signals WILL travel in parallel over equal
distances from the amplifier, so all the speakers
should blare "simultaneously". I think the problem
that Relativity has with this is that it wants to
use a single point as the origin of a descriptive
reference frame, and a single point is inadequate
to deal with multiple parallel signals -- only
ONE of which can pass through that Origin. On the
other hand, there is still room for nitpickiness,
since how accurately can we cut those hundreds of
wires all exactly the same length? But then, this
is a THOUGHT-experiment, and something like that
should be allowed! Finally, if one wants to be
nitpicky about the varying distances from each
speaker to however-many men will hear it, then I
could resort to specifying two thousand headphones
instead of a lesser number of speakers, and that
eliminates the speed-of-sound-in-air reason for
nitpickiness. In conclusion, for PRACTICAL
purposes, we can get "close enough" to "unison",
that this thought-experiment is not invalidated.
So, here is my answer for "equation of motion
for the battering ram": For the given scenario,
there can't be an equation of motion for the
battering ram, as (if I understood correctly)
the author intends no upper limit on the amount
of impulse allowed on the battering ram (as
is clear in his assertion that the battering ram
cannot be broken) while stipulating that the
mechanical force can "only" travel at the speed
of sound, which, following from his assertions,
is infinite. (And... if we are going to start
approximating the battering ram as some sort of
"super spring," a spring (so... non-rigid
assumption in effect now.. allowing speed of
sound to be finite in the "rod") with infinite
elastic range, then I'm afraid it's outside my
expertise--as I do not believe it will be a SHM
any longer--I'll need a few more classes on
advanced mechanics before I tackle that.) So,
this is a poorly thought out scenario
(specifically, it is a scenario where the
theories, assumptions, and approximations are
taken out of their valid range), and whoever
worries too much over this scenario is, well, not
spending enough time in studying physics and
wasting too much time on some sort of modern
alchemy (that is, trying to break the conservation
law of momentum).
Best wishes,
Andrew
Again, I do thank you for your analysis. Perhaps,
if the clarifications I've tried to provide are
adequate, you might consider trying again?
Please!
Vernon Nemitz
.
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|