Mass and inertia at high speeds

In summary: The force in these cases are always transverse to the motion...Force is always perpendicular to the motion in a particle accelerator.
  • #1
johann1301
217
1
When a particle is traveling very close to c. Will its mass actually increase and therefore its ability to resist change in its state of motion increase, OR will JUST its ability to resist change in its state of motion increase and the mass will remain the same?

Will the particle just behave as the mass has increased, or will the mass actually increase?

(And if the mass actually increases, what would that really mean?)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The mass actually increases.
 
  • #3
HallsofIvy said:
The mass actually increases.

Ok, now what does that mean;

If the particle is moving in this state through a gravitational field, would the gravitational force on it be stronger? Do they actually account for this in particle accelerators?
 
  • #4
These days, the term "mass" refers to the invariant mass, which is a property of the particle that doesn't change with speed. (The old-fashioned concept of 'relativistic mass', which does increase with speed, has largely been dropped as having too many problems.)

So to answer your question: Mass remains invariant. But resistance to change in motion depends on velocity (and direction!).
 
  • #5
Invariant means that its a constant?
 
  • #6
johann1301 said:
Invariant means that its a constant?
Yes, that it is frame independent. The same, regardless of speed.
 
  • #7
Doc Al said:
Resistance to change in motion depends on velocity (and direction!).
Direction? How is that?
 
  • #8
adjacent said:
Direction? How is that?
The same force acting on the same particle will produce a different acceleration depending on the direction the force is applied. For example: Pushing something transverse to its motion requires less force that pushing something in the direction it's moving (to get the same acceleration).
 
  • #9
Doc Al said:
For example: Pushing something transverse to its motion requires less force that pushing something in the direction it's moving (to get the same acceleration).
I don't understand. Will not the same force always produce the same acceleration?
Are you talking about the net acceleration?
 
  • #10
So they don't account for a gravitational increase in accelerators?
 
  • #11
Doc Al said:
The same force acting on the same particle will produce a different acceleration depending on the direction the force is applied. For example: Pushing something transverse to its motion requires less force that pushing something in the direction it's moving (to get the same acceleration).


Then why do they use the formula:

F=((lorentz)mv^2)/r

for circular accelerators? The force in these cases are always transverse to the motion...

Read about it here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centripetal_force
 
Last edited:
  • #12
adjacent said:
I don't understand. Will not the same force always produce the same acceleration?
No. As the speed of a particle increases, it takes more force to produce the same acceleration.
 
  • #13
johann1301 said:
Then why do they use the formula:

F=((lorentz)mv^2)/r

for accelerators? The force in these cases are always transverse to the motion...
What does that have to do with what I posted?

In any case, for forces transverse to the motion: [itex]F_t = m\gamma a_t[/itex].
 
  • #14
Doc Al said:
No. As the speed of a particle increases, it takes more force to produce the same acceleration.
That contradicts ##F=ma##.
Uhh. That's Newtonian Universe. So as the speed increases,the mass increases,so the same force produce a lesser acceleration.
Oh. i understand.
 
  • #15
adjacent said:
That contradicts ##F=ma##.
Uhh. That's Newtonian Universe. So as the speed increases,the mass increases,so the same force produce a lesser acceleration.
Oh. i understand.
Yes, the Newtonian F = ma is approximately true for low speeds, but not relativistic speeds. But F = dp/dt works, even relativistically. (Of course you must use the relativistic momentum.)

I would forget the part about mass increasing. Best to stick with invariant mass.
 
  • #16
johann1301 said:
Then why do they use the formula:

F=((lorentz)mv^2)/r

for circular accelerators? The force in these cases are always transverse to the motion...

Read about it here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centripetal_force

[tex]\vec{F}=\frac{d \vec{p}}{dt}[/tex]

1. In Newtonian physics

[tex]\vec{p}=m \vec{v}[/tex]

so

[tex]\vec{F}=m\frac{d \vec{v}}{dt}=m \vec{a}[/tex]

2. In reality, SR teaches us that :

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

Therefore:

[tex]\vec{F}=m \gamma \frac{d \vec{v}}{dt}+m \vec{v} \frac{d \gamma}{dt}=\gamma m \vec{a}+\gamma^3 ma\frac{v\vec{v}}{c^2} [/tex]

so, force has not only a component along the acceleration but also one aligned wit the velocity, unlike in Newtonian physics where force is aligned with the acceleration.

The above complicates the equations of motion for particle accelerators because we have to solve a very complicated set of differential equations produced by the fact that

[tex]\vec{F}=q(\vec{E}+\vec{v} \times \vec{B})[/tex]

In other words we need to solve:

[tex]q(\vec{E}+\vec{v} \times \vec{B})=m \gamma \frac{d \vec{v}}{dt}+m \vec{v} \frac{d \gamma}{dt}[/tex]

If [itex]\vec{E} \ne 0[/itex] the resulting equation is very tough to solve (symbolic solutions still exist). On the other hand, if [itex]\vec{E} = 0[/itex] then the force is perpendicular on the speed and the equation is much easier to solve (for details, see Bill_K's post below).
 
Last edited:
  • #17
Doc Al said:
The same force acting on the same particle will produce a different acceleration depending on the direction the force is applied. For example: Pushing something transverse to its motion requires less force that pushing something in the direction it's moving (to get the same acceleration).
Force in SR can be defined in several different ways. Let's say we use F = dp/dt where p = γmv and γ = √(1 - v2/c2).

If the force is transverse, |v| will be constant, hence γ will be constant, and we just get F = γma. But if the force is parallel to the motion, in performing the derivative we must include dγ/dt as well. After some algebra the result turns out to be F = γ3ma.

Since γ > 1, the second result is greater than the first, and we see it takes more force to accelerate a mass in the parallel direction than transversely.
 
  • #18
adjacent said:
I don't understand. Will not the same force always produce the same acceleration?
Are you talking about the net acceleration?
It's worth pointing out that in relativity, acceleration (like many other things) is relative. Although all inertial observers agree whether something is accelerating or not, they may disagree over the numerical value of a non-zero acceleration. Proper acceleration is the acceleration measured in an inertial frame where the velocity is momentarily zero. It's also what accelerometers measure. Proper acceleration does not depend on the direction of the applied force, but coordinate acceleration does depend on the angle between the force and the (non-zero) velocity.

So, to answer your question, the same force always produces the same proper acceleration (for a given mass -- i.e. rest mass), but not necessarily the same coordinate acceleration.
 
  • #19
DrGreg said:
It's worth pointing out that in relativity, acceleration (like many other things) is relative. Although all inertial observers agree whether something is accelerating or not, they may disagree over the numerical value of a non-zero acceleration. Proper acceleration is the acceleration measured in an inertial frame where the velocity is momentarily zero. It's also what accelerometers measure. Proper acceleration does not depend on the direction of the applied force, but coordinate acceleration does depend on the angle between the force and the (non-zero) velocity.

So, to answer your question, the same force always produces the same proper acceleration (for a given mass -- i.e. rest mass), but not necessarily the same coordinate acceleration.
Good clarification. My comments earlier were for coordinate acceleration, not proper acceleration.
 

FAQ: Mass and inertia at high speeds

1. What is mass and how is it related to inertia at high speeds?

Mass is a measure of the amount of matter an object contains. It is directly related to inertia, which is the tendency of an object to resist changes in its state of motion. At high speeds, an object's mass increases due to relativistic effects, making it more difficult to accelerate or decelerate.

2. Does an object's mass increase or decrease at high speeds?

An object's mass increases at high speeds due to the effects of special relativity. As an object approaches the speed of light, its mass increases infinitely, making it impossible to reach the speed of light itself.

3. How does inertia change as an object approaches the speed of light?

Inertia increases as an object approaches the speed of light. This means that it becomes more difficult to accelerate or decelerate the object, and it requires significantly more energy to do so.

4. Can an object with a high mass and inertia still be accelerated?

Yes, an object with a high mass and inertia can still be accelerated, but it would require a significant amount of energy to do so. This is because the object's increased mass at high speeds means that more force is needed to cause a change in its motion.

5. How does mass and inertia at high speeds impact space travel?

Mass and inertia at high speeds have a significant impact on space travel. Due to the increased mass and inertia, it becomes more difficult and energy-intensive to propel a spacecraft to high speeds. It also means that objects in space, such as satellites, must be carefully calculated and designed to account for their increased mass and inertia at high speeds.

Back
Top