Pasta Problem Cracked!

An intrepid undergrad led the way to understanding the physics of snapping strands of spaghetti.

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Physicists concern themselves with problems that are profound. The origins of the universe, the nature of time, the composition of matter. And then, there’s spaghetti. A pasta problem has perplexed physicists as celebrated as Richard Feynman, and has even been awarded an Ig Nobel prize. At issue:

“Why spaghetti doesn’t break into two pieces. Why it breaks into three pieces or more.”

Ronald Heisser, now a grad student at Cornell, decided to explore the misbehavior of spaghetti for an undergraduate math course he took at MIT.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Now, you may never have noticed it, but it’s nearly impossible to break a single, dry piece of spaghetti in half. Feynman allegedly noodled with the puzzle. And Heisser became similarly possessed.

“I’m a little bit of a contrarian person. So I thought it would be fun to try and break it into two. ‘Cause no one said you couldn’t do that. They just said why it doesn’t break into two.”

In fact, the French researchers who were awarded the Ig Nobel prize in 2006 found that when spaghetti is bent evenly from both ends it will crack near the center, where the stick is most curved. But this initial break sets up a vibrational wave that quickly fractures the rod further. So you get multiple fragments.

What Heisser wondered was whether he could somehow get around this vibrational “snapback” effect. And he found you have to do the twistHeisser built a device for torquing his pasta with precision and he observed the resulting fragmentation with a high-speed camera. He discovered that introducing a twist of around 360 degrees to the long strand allowed him to produce the desired single pair of pasta pieces.

That’s where Vishal Patil, a grad student in mathematics at MIT, comes in:

“So I first heard about this spaghetti problem from coauthors Ronald Heisser and Professor Jörn Dunkel when I first arrived at MIT…and after hearing about this problem, I became interested in developing mathematical models for the fracture of this elastic rod. And in particular, to see if using this model you could find out ways to control the fracture in the rod.”

Controlling fractures is a big issue in materials science and could have applications in everything from the design of highways and bridges to the engineering of nanotubes.

Patil’s modeling showed that twisting the spaghetti dampens the snapback effect. That’s because once the twisted stick is broken, it will try to unwind. This rapid unwinding creates a “twisting wave” that basically blocks the vibrational snapback wave, leaving the spaghetti in two clean pieces. The work is served up in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. [Ronald H. Heisser et al., Controlling fracture cascades through twisting and quenching]

VP: “Although the project was a bit of fun I think it’s quite nice when you can find interesting physics and maths lurking behind everyday, mundane objects.”

—Karen Hopkin

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe