Who Shot First: The Theoretical Physicist's Answer

[Geordnet]

Source: Original Work.

Cookies for whomever understands this one.
(Note: you need to know a thing or two about the Theory of Relativity, namely Simultaneity.)

[Asta Kask]

I don't know. IIRC the order of events is always conserved. I may be wrong on that.

[Irk]

assuming Han is a student of zen-like mysticism

No need to assume.

[Aedilred]

No need to assume.

How else could he master those moves?

[TheThan]

Star Wars clearly uses Cowboy justice.

Greedo had a gun pointed at Han. Han’s life was clearly in danger and he defended it by killing Greedo. He was completely within his rights to do so.

[Ifni]

I don't know. IIRC the order of events is always conserved. I may be wrong on that.

It's conserved if they're timelike separated. Not conserved if they're spacelike separated. So if they shot really, really close together in time in the bar frame (less than (distance apart in the bar frame)/c, so about 10 nanoseconds?), who shot first from an observer's perspective will depend on the frame of the observer. In this scenario, both guys also fired before they saw the other guy shoot (and before they heard it, and well before the bullet reached them), so neither of them is really in the clear here

[Crow]

How else could he master those moves?

Hoooooboy! Thanks for that. Gold.

Star Wars clearly uses Cowboy justice.

Greedo had a gun pointed at Han. Han’s life was clearly in danger and he defended it by killing Greedo. He was completely within his rights to do so.

That isn't cowboy justice. That's the lethal force law in my state (California).

[Stardrake]

It's conserved if they're timelike separated. Not conserved if they're spacelike separated. So if they shot really, really close together in time in the bar frame (less than (distance apart in the bar frame)/c, so about 10 nanoseconds?), who shot first from an observer's perspective will depend on the frame of the observer. In this scenario, both guys also fired before they saw the other guy shoot (and before they heard it, and well before the bullet reached them), so neither of them is really in the clear here

I think they were about a meter apart, so it would be 1/3x10^8 seconds, which comes to... about 3 nanoseconds. So your guesstimate was basically on the mark, and even closer if my memory is off and they were a little further apart.

[Ifni]

I think they were about a meter apart, so it would be 1/3x10^8 seconds, which comes to... about 3 nanoseconds. So your guesstimate was basically on the mark, and even closer if my memory is off and they were a little further apart.

Yeah, I was doing order-of-magnitude physicist estimation, as I couldn't remember the scene, but figured 3m would be in the right order of magnitude (That is, they wouldn't be less than 30cm or more than 30m apart.) If it was about a meter, yeah, correct "10 ns" to "a few ns".

[Asta Kask]

If we stipulate that the Universe can be in one of two possible states - 1) Han shoots first, or 2) Greedo shot first - then we can imagine the Universe being in a superposition between the two states. The act of measurement - bringing in the camera crew - forces the Universe into one of these two states or, possibly, to split into two Universes. I postulate that we lived in Universe 1) from 1977 to 1997 when there was a "reality quake" which brought us into universe 2). The artefacts of Universe 1) are the rubble of that reality quake.

[Lettuce]

Why is this even a question? Han shot first in the original, in 1977. Greedo didn't shoot AT ALL until 1997.

You would have to have some very special relativity indeed to have a universe where Greedo shoot first.

[Asta Kask]

It's not that easy, AmberWynne. The temporal discrepancies between frames of reference increase with distance. Since this took place "a long time ago in a galaxy far far away", very small differences can be amplified greatly.

[Ifni]

Why is this even a question? Han shot first in the original, in 1977. Greedo didn't shoot AT ALL until 1997.

You would have to have some very special relativity indeed to have a universe where Greedo shoot first.

Hmm. One meter... twenty years... if the speed of light was 10^(-9) m/s instead of 3*10^8 m/s, that might do it?

[GPuzzle]

Han Shot First is a misnomer.

Han shot only.

[Jay R]

Han had a readied action. So when Greedo decided to shoot first, Han got off his readied shot first.

[EternalHobbyist]

Star Wars clearly uses Cowboy justice.

Greedo had a gun pointed at Han. Han’s life was clearly in danger and he defended it by killing Greedo. He was completely within his rights to do so.

I'm with Than. Han acted completely in self defense. Also, Greedo had a proven record as a kidnapper and thug who could not be trusted.

Han's actions are completely justified, and only after 20 years of bleeding-heart brainwashing did we feel the need to alter our own perceptions to include Greedo firing to make Han seem like "the Good Guy". He was always the Good Guy.

[Jay R]

If Han's action was wrong, then so was Obi-Wan's. He certainly sliced off somebody's arm first.

[GPuzzle]

I've told you guys, Han shot only.

[rs2excelsior]

Why is this even a question? Han shot first in the original, in 1977. Greedo didn't shoot AT ALL until 1997.

You would have to have some very special relativity indeed to have a universe where Greedo shoot first.

The joke here is that, according to relativity, the order of two events can be different for observers in different reference frames. Of course, since (as you point out) Greedo never actually got his shot off, this wouldn't apply, but it's a joke. Just roll with it.

[TheThan]

Hoooooboy! Thanks for that. Gold.



That isn't cowboy justice. That's the lethal force law in my state (California).

Its the same idea.

The very idea that you can't defend yourself when your life is in danger is preposterous, yet there are people who actually believe that.

[Asta Kask]

Its the same idea.

The very idea that you can't defend yourself when your life is in danger is preposterous, yet there are people who actually believe that.

It's an idea that has been popular among philosophers from time to time. Socrates says that we must never repay evil with evil, for instance. And there are religious figures who have said it as well. Although that is threading on dangerous ground.

[Jay R]

There is a significant difference with returning evil for evil (seeking revenge after the initial situation is over), and defending against present danger.

[Asta Kask]

There is a significant difference with returning evil for evil (seeking revenge after the initial situation is over), and defending against present danger.

I agree with that, but I don't think that's what Socrates meant. I think he really advocated - at least for the sake of the argument - a kind of total pacifism. It's been a long time since I read the dialogue though (I think it's Gorgias).

[SMEE]

GPuzzle is clearly right.
Saying that Han shot first implies that Greedo also shot.
That didn't happen.

Han shot, Greedo died. End of story.

[Jay R]

I agree with that, but I don't think that's what Socrates meant. I think he really advocated - at least for the sake of the argument - a kind of total pacifism. It's been a long time since I read the dialogue though (I think it's Gorgias).

It seems inconsistent with that part of Gorgias I know, in which Socrates states that people should be punished when they do wrong.

"Thus wrongdoing is second of evils in greatness; but to do wrong and not pay the penalty is the greatest and takes the first place among all evils."

[nedz]

I thought that Socrates was all about the Rule of Law: People should be punished when the Law says they should be — hence that incident with the Hemlock.

Anyway, back on thread.
Empirically: the only frame that matters is the one in the camera, or the editing studio apparently, since we can only infer other frames of reference.