this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2025
1116 points (98.2% liked)

Science Memes

17304 readers
2269 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] peoplebeproblems@midwest.social 22 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Speed of light in a true vacuum.

Speed of light through any non-vacuum decreases.

The speed of causality remains the same.

[–] tetris11@feddit.uk 7 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

is the speed of causality tied to speed of light in a vacuum, or independent of it?

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 22 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

As I understand, the speed of light in vacuum is bound by the speed of causality. So, light would go at infinite speed, if it could (it being massless means any acceleration should result in infinite speed), but instead it goes as fast as the universe allows, which is the speed of causality.

[–] psud@aussie.zone 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

If you consider light in motion as a wave (as it is in EM models and I think also in current mainstream physics) then you can't expect it to work like matter. The speed of light is the speed at which EM waves propagate. Causality is the same because many interactions are mediated by exchange of photons via EM waves.

The speed of light in aluminium is ~0.95c, the EM waves in an aluminium antenna aren't going to interact outside the aluminium faster than 0.95c. I would bet the effective speed of causality would never be greater than the speed of light in whatever medium the light is in

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I'm no expert. I probably know too little about the propagation speed of a wave to understand what you mean there.

But here is a scenario where something is faster than light in the given medium: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherenkov_radiation

As I understand, neutrons and gravitational waves are also bound by the speed of causality, because they have no mass. And I believe, unlike light, they are unaffected by electromagnetic forces that a material exerts, so they would presumably (always?) travel faster than light in that medium.

I will also say, that from what little I understand of this video: https://www.pbs.org/video/pbs-space-time-speed-light-not-about-light/
...it sounds like trying to determine the speed of causality by measuring it, is kind of backwards. You're at best experimentally confirming what has to be a given under our laws of physics.

[–] psud@aussie.zone 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

If the photons were travelling faster than the local speed of light, why would light be emitted? The Cherenkov radiation takes away the excess energy as the light is immediately slowed as it moves from whatever radioactive metal to water

Gravity waves are indeed different. I don't know the maths of relativity, but I bet those equations also require specific wave speeds. They don't care about matter aside from it's gravity which can bend space-time and change the wave path

I think we're pushing this beyond both our understanding

Measuring causality/c despite those being given by our maths refines our values for the various constants

[–] frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Speed of Causality is the absolute maximum speed. It's the theoretical maximum that any cause could propagate an effect. Speed of Light in a (perfect) vacuum happens to be equal to the Speed of Causality.

[–] MojoMcJojo@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Is the speed of causation propagation linked to plank length?

[–] Natanael@infosec.pub 3 points 2 weeks ago

Yes, it's derived from 4 physical constants including c

[–] Smokeydope@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Is the speed of causation propagation linked to plank length?

Yes, more specifically the Planck length is derived from an equation involving the speed of light/causality.

Where C is light, h is reduced planck constant, and G is gravitational constant. Together they tell us the fundamental unit length of meaningful distinction, a very important yard stick for measuring the smallest distances.

[–] tetris11@feddit.uk 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

is the plank length tied to the speed of events or is it just the shortest distance light can move

[–] Smokeydope@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Its more related to limits of knowability of events beyond a certain scale. Its easy an intuitive to think of it like spacetime is quantized like pixels on a grid with a minimum action requirement of time and energy to move between them. But its not that simple or at least that kind of granular discreteness is not proven (though there are digital physics frameworks that treat spacetime discrete like this)

The Planck length does not define the minimum distance something can move but rather the minimum scale of meaningful measurement that can make a bit of distinction between two microsstates of information. In essence it says that if theres two continuous computational paths that differ by less than a sub-plancks worth of distinction there is no measurable distinction difference between them and the paths get blurred together.

Its a precision limit that defines how exact we can measure interactions that happen within the distance between two points.

It's possible that spacetime is continuous at a fundamental level, but the Planck length represents the scale at which quantum fluctuations of spacetime itself become so violent that the concepts of a 'path' or a 'distance' can no longer be defined in the classical sense, effectively creating discrete quantized limits for measurement precision.

Ultimately this precision bound limit is related to energy cost to actualize a measurement from a superposition and the exponetial increase in energy needed to overcome uncertainty principle at smaller and smaller scales. The energy required to actualize a meaningful state from a sub-planck length would be enough to create a kugelblitz black hole made from pure condensed energy.

This same logic applies to time, giving us the Planck time, the shortest meaningful interval. So, in a way, the Planck scale does define a fundamental limit on the 'speed' at which distinguishable events can occur.

[–] tetris11@feddit.uk 1 points 1 week ago

Thanks for this, I had no idea it was more a precision limitation