Does kinetic energy vary by frame of reference?

In summary: Kinetic energy is a quantity that varies depending on the velocity of the observer, and is different for observers moving at different speeds. This is because kinetic energy is related to the velocity of a particle, which is a relative quantity. The kinetic energy can be calculated using the formula 1/2mv^2, where m is the mass of the particle and v is its velocity. This formula also includes a relativistic correction term, which accounts for the effects of special relativity. Therefore, the kinetic energy is an observer-dependent quantity and can be different for different observers.
  • #1
Bigman
27
0
Kinetic energy is 1/2mv^2, and velocity varies depending on velocity of the observer, so does kinetic energy also vary depending on the velocity of the observer? for example, someone sitting in a bus who slides a 2 kg brick down the center isle of the bus at 5 m/s could say the has a kinetic energy of 25 joules, while someone on the side of the road who observes the brick's velocity as 55m/s (the bus is doing 50m/s) would say the bricks kinetic energy is 3025 joules. would they both be right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Yes, KE is an observer-dependent quantity!

Bigman said:
Kinetic energy is 1/2mv^2, and velocity varies depending on velocity of the observer, so does kinetic energy also vary depending on the velocity of the observer?

The relativistic expression for the kinetic energy of a particle with mass m moving at velocity v wrt some inertial observer (in flat spacetime) is
[tex]
{\rm KE} = m \, \left( -1 + \cosh(\operatorname{arctanh}(v)) \right) = m \left( -1 + \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-v^2}} \right) = \frac{1}{2} \, m v^2 + \frac{3}{8} \, m v^4 + O(v^6)
[/tex]
where the first term in the last expression is the Newtonian expression for the kinetic energy (of a particle with mass m moving at velocity v wrt some inertial observer). All the "relativistic correction terms" here are positive, so the relativistic expression is always greater than the Newtonian expression, but they agree pretty nearly when v is much smaller than unity. (I am using "geometric units" in which c=1.) It was from examining the expression [itex]m \cosh{\operatorname{arctanh}{v}}[/itex] that Einstein deduced the famous equivalence of mass and energy, incidently!

Now, holding m fixed and varying v it is easy to see that the KE varies in both Newtonian and relativistic physics, so KE is an observer-dependent quantity.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
kinetic energy transformation

Chris Hillman said:
The relativistic expression for the kinetic energy of a particle with mass m moving at velocity v wrt some inertial observer (in flat spacetime) is
[tex]
{\rm KE} = m \, \left( -1 + \cosh(\operatorname{arctanh}(v)) \right) = m \left( -1 + \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-v^2}} \right) = \frac{1}{2} \, m v^2 + \frac{3}{8} \, m v^4 + O(v^6)
[/tex]
where the first term in the last expression is the Newtonian expression for the kinetic energy (of a particle with mass m moving at velocity v wrt some inertial observer). All the "relativistic correction terms" here are positive, so the relativistic expression is always greater than the Newtonian expression, but they agree pretty nearly when v is much smaller than unity. (I am using "geometric units" in which c=1.) It was from examining the expression [itex]m \cosh{\operatorname{arctanh}{v}}[/itex] that Einstein deduced the famous equivalence of mass and energy, incidently!

Now, holding m fixed and varying v it is easy to see that the KE varies in both Newtonian and relativistic physics, so KE is an observer-dependent quantity.
Please tell me if the kinetic energy of a particle is K in I and K' in I' then how are they related. Do you know a place where the problem is discussed. Thanks in advance.
 
  • #4
Bigman said:
Kinetic energy is 1/2mv^2, and velocity varies depending on velocity of the observer, so does kinetic energy also vary depending on the velocity of the observer? for example, someone sitting in a bus who slides a 2 kg brick down the center isle of the bus at 5 m/s could say the has a kinetic energy of 25 joules, while someone on the side of the road who observes the brick's velocity as 55m/s (the bus is doing 50m/s) would say the bricks kinetic energy is 3025 joules. would they both be right?
The short answer is yes. Kinetic energy, like velocity, is different for observers moving at different speeds.
 
  • #5
bernhard.rothenstein said:
Please tell me if the kinetic energy of a particle is K in I and K' in I' then how are they related.

The total energy [itex]E = K + m_0 c^2[/itex] and momentum [itex]p[/itex] in two different inertial reference frames are related by the Lorentz transformation:

[tex]p^{\prime}c = \gamma (pc - \beta E)[/tex]

[tex]E^{\prime} = \gamma (E - \beta pc)[/tex]

because [itex]E[/itex] and [itex]pc[/itex] form a four-vector just like [itex]ct[/itex] and [itex]x[/itex].

[tex]x^{\prime} = \gamma (x - \beta ct)[/tex]

[tex]ct^{\prime} = \gamma (ct - \beta x)[/tex]
 
  • #6
kinetic energy transformation

jtbell said:
The total energy [itex]E = K + m_0 c^2[/itex] and momentum [itex]p[/itex] in two different inertial reference frames are related by the Lorentz transformation:

[tex]p^{\prime}c = \gamma (pc - \beta E)[/tex]

[tex]E^{\prime} = \gamma (E - \beta pc)[/tex]

because [itex]E[/itex] and [itex]pc[/itex] form a four-vector just like [itex]ct[/itex] and [itex]x[/itex].

[tex]x^{\prime} = \gamma (x - \beta ct)[/tex]

[tex]ct^{\prime} = \gamma (ct - \beta x)[/tex]
Thanks for your answer. My question is how does transform kinetic energy? It would be correct to approach as
dW(k)=F(x)dx
dW'(k)=F'(x)dx'
and to take into account F(x)=F'(x)
(W(k), W'(k) kinetic energy in I and I', F(x) and F'(x) the OX components of the force acting on the particle.
 
  • #7
man, i see a lot of symbols i don't recognize (like the upper case beta and the trig functions with the 'h' on the end), but i think i get the jist of it. at the very least, i know that the answer to my question is yes :D thanks for the responses guys
 
  • #8
Bigman said:
man, i see a lot of symbols i don't recognize (like the upper case beta and the trig functions with the 'h' on the end), but i think i get the jist of it. at the very least, i know that the answer to my question is yes :D thanks for the responses guys

[itex]\beta = v/c[/itex]

The hyperbolic trig functions referred to are described for instance at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hyperbolic_function&oldid=167748987
 
  • #9
If you want to transform KE between reference frames I would recommend using the four-momentum. Energy is the timelike part of the four-momentum and momentum is the spacelike part. Together they transform like any other four-vector.
 

1. What is kinetic energy?

Kinetic energy is the energy an object possesses due to its motion. It is a scalar quantity and is dependent on the mass and velocity of the object.

2. How is kinetic energy calculated?

Kinetic energy is calculated using the formula KE = 1/2 * mv^2, where m is the mass of the object and v is its velocity. The resulting unit for kinetic energy is joules (J).

3. Does kinetic energy vary by frame of reference?

Yes, kinetic energy can vary by frame of reference. This means that the observed kinetic energy of an object can be different depending on the observer's perspective or point of reference. This is due to the relative motion between the object and the observer.

4. How does the concept of frame of reference affect kinetic energy?

The concept of frame of reference affects kinetic energy because it is the point from which an object's motion is observed. Depending on the frame of reference, the observed velocity and therefore the observed kinetic energy of an object can be different.

5. Can kinetic energy be negative?

Yes, kinetic energy can be negative. This occurs when an object is decelerating or moving in the opposite direction of its initial velocity. In this case, the kinetic energy is converted into other forms of energy, such as potential energy or heat.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
51
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
238
Replies
4
Views
791
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
17
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
58
Views
4K
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
13
Views
1K
Back
Top