Can Newton's Second Law be Applied to Relativistic Motion?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Newton's second law in the context of relativistic motion, specifically how to express force in terms of relativistic momentum and acceleration.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to differentiate the momentum expression to derive a relationship involving force and acceleration. Some participants question the steps taken in the differentiation process and suggest reviewing the application of the chain rule.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, offering insights into the differentiation process and identifying potential errors in the original poster's approach. There is a collaborative effort to clarify the mathematical steps involved, although no consensus on a complete solution has been reached.

Contextual Notes

There is an indication that the original poster may have overlooked certain factors during differentiation, which has led to confusion in arriving at the desired result. The discussion highlights the importance of careful application of calculus in the context of relativistic physics.

lylos
Messages
77
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Newton's second law is given by [tex]\vec{F}[/tex]=[tex]\frac{d\vec{p}}{dt}[/tex]. If the force is always parallel to the velocity, show that [tex]\vec{F}[/tex]=[tex]\gamma^{3}m\vec{a}[/tex].


Homework Equations


[tex]p=\gamma m\vec{v}[/tex]
[tex]\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}=\vec{a}[/tex]
[tex]\gamma = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution


I figure all you need to do would be to find d/dt of p. After a couple tries, I'm still unable to get the result that it provides.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, that's what you do, and it's straightforward enough. No real tricks. Maybe you could show us an attempt?
 
http://picasaweb.google.com/barry.farmer/Hw/photo?authkey=byWKUltIRn8#5109819187179884178

Here's a scan of what I did... at the very bottom I was then lost.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You missed a factor of dv/dt in the first term when you did the chain rule. So factoring out all of the common terms (gamma*m*dv/dt), you only need to show that (v^2/c^2)/(1-v^2/c^2)+1=gamma^2. You are almost there.
 
Dick said:
You missed a factor of dv/dt in the first term when you did the chain rule. So factoring out all of the common terms (gamma*m*dv/dt), you only need to show that (v^2/c^2)/(1-v^2/c^2)+1=gamma^2. You are almost there.

Thanks for your help... I didn't realize that when I would take the derivative of -v^2/c^2 that it would be (-2v/c^2)(dv/dt). I think that's what you were getting at. I was able to get the answer that way :)
 
That's what I was getting at.
 

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
26
Views
5K