Derivation of Velocity from Acceleration in Special Relativity

In summary, you get stuck trying to integrate the equation for the velocity of a particle with relativistic momentum. You would start with your last equation, differentiate both sides with respect to t, and solve the resulting differential equation.
  • #1
ecastro
254
8
I got stuck in deriving the velocity of the particle from the acceleration equation. Here are the details of the problem.

The acceleration of a particle with a relativistic momentum is

[itex]\vec{a} = \frac{\vec{F}}{\gamma m} - \frac{\vec{v}}{\gamma m c^2}\left(\vec{F} \cdot \vec{v}\right)[/itex].

By integrating the above equation, the velocity of the particle can be calculated if the force applied and the mass of the particle are given. The greek letter [itex]\gamma[/itex] in this case is [itex]\left(1 - \frac{v^2}{c^2}\right)^{-1/2}[/itex]

Considering that a constant force [itex]\it{F}[/itex] is applied to a mass [itex]\it{m}[/itex] initially at rest, the velocity of the particle is

[itex]\int \vec{a} dt = \int \left[\frac{\vec{F}}{\gamma m} - \frac{\vec{v}}{\gamma m c^2}\left(\vec{F} \cdot \vec{v}\right)\right] dt \\

\vec{v} = \int \left[\frac{\vec{F}}{\gamma m} - \frac{\vec{v^2}}{\gamma m c^2}\left(\vec{F} \right)\right] dt[/itex].

Since [itex]F[/itex] and [itex]m[/itex] are constants in time, they are removed from the integral. Gamma is taken out from the two terms. Then,

[itex]\vec{v} = \frac{\vec{F}}{m} \int \frac{1}{\gamma} \left(1 - \frac{v^2}{c^2}\right) dt[/itex].

Using the definition of gamma, the integrand is

[itex]\vec{v} = \frac{\vec{F}}{m} \int \left(1 - \frac{v^2}{c^2}\right)^{3/2} dt[/itex].

This is where I get stuck. I don't know how to integrate it since the integrand is not a direct function of [itex]t[/itex] but of [itex]v[/itex] which is a function of [itex]t[/itex]. I tried having [itex]v = at[/itex], but I don't know if this is correct.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You cannot substitute v=at because that only works if a is constant, which it is not here. Personally, I would start with your last equation, differentiate both sides with respect to t, and solve the resulting differential equation. Are you familiar with differential equations, or do you have access to a math package like Mathematica?
 
  • #3
ecastro said:
Using the definition of gamma, the integrand is

[itex]\vec{v} = \frac{\vec{F}}{m} \int \left(1 - \frac{v^2}{c^2}\right)^{3/2} dt[/itex].

This is where I get stuck. I don't know how to integrate it since the integrand is not a direct function of [itex]t[/itex] but of [itex]v[/itex] which is a function of [itex]t[/itex].

You have the differential equation
[tex]\frac{{dv}}{{dt}} = \frac{F}{m} \cdot \left( {1 - \frac{{v^2 }}{{c^2 }}} \right)^{\frac{3}{2}}[/tex]
that can be solved by separation of variables.
 
  • #4
You have to know F(x,v,a,t). If F is constant, or a function of only t, then [itex] m\gamma^3 dv=Fdt[/itex]
can be integrated.
 
  • #5
DaleSpam said:
You cannot substitute v=at because that only works if a is constant, which it is not here. Personally, I would start with your last equation, differentiate both sides with respect to t, and solve the resulting differential equation. Are you familiar with differential equations, or do you have access to a math package like Mathematica?

Yes. I am familiar with the mathematics. The resulting differential equation will be the one shown by DrStupid. By separating the variables,

[itex]\frac{dv}{dt} = \frac{F}{m} \cdot \left(\frac{c^2 - v^2}{c^2}\right)^{3/2} = \frac{F}{m c^2} \cdot \left(c^2 - v^2\right)^{3/2} \\
\left(c^2 - v^2\right)^{-3/2} dv = \frac{F}{m c^2} dt \\
\int \left(c^2 - v^2\right)^{-3/2} dv= \int \frac{F}{m c^2} dt \\
\frac{v}{c^2 \sqrt{c^2 - v^2}} = \frac{F t}{m c^2}.[/itex]

Could you please check the mathematics? After this, I just need to solve for [itex]v[/itex], right?

clem said:
You have to know F(x,v,a,t). If F is constant, or a function of only t, then [itex]m γ^3 dv = F dt[/itex] can be integrated.

Would you be suggesting that [itex]dt = \frac{m \gamma^3}{F} dv[/itex]? If I were to substitute this to my last equation, wouldn't be the constants [itex]F[/itex] and [itex]m[/itex] cancel, so does [itex]\gamma[/itex]? I would be left out with the integral of [itex]dv[/itex] which will result into [itex]v[/itex].
 
  • #6
ecastro said:
[itex]\frac{dv}{dt} = \frac{F}{m} \cdot \left(\frac{c^2 - v^2}{c^2}\right)^{3/2} = \frac{F}{m c^2} \cdot \left(c^2 - v^2\right)^{3/2}[/itex]

[itex]\frac{dv}{dt} = \frac{F}{m} \cdot \left(\frac{c^2 - v^2}{c^2}\right)^{3/2} = \frac{F}{m c^3} \cdot \left(c^2 - v^2\right)^{3/2}[/itex]

should be more accurate
 
  • #7
Oh, yes, I forgot about the 3rd-power-exponent. Thanks a lot!
 

1. What is the equation for deriving velocity from acceleration in special relativity?

The equation for deriving velocity from acceleration in special relativity is v = u + at, where v is the final velocity, u is the initial velocity, a is the acceleration, and t is the time interval.

2. How does the concept of time dilation affect the derivation of velocity from acceleration in special relativity?

Time dilation, which is a result of the theory of special relativity, states that time appears to pass slower for an object in motion relative to an observer. This means that the time interval t in the equation v = u + at may be different for the moving object and the observer, leading to a different final velocity v.

3. Can the equation for deriving velocity from acceleration in special relativity be used for objects moving at any speed?

No, the equation v = u + at is only applicable for objects moving at constant acceleration, which is a special case in special relativity. For objects moving at varying accelerations, a more complex equation is needed.

4. How does the equation for deriving velocity from acceleration in special relativity differ from the classical equation?

The classical equation for deriving velocity from acceleration is v = u + at, where v is the final velocity, u is the initial velocity, a is the acceleration, and t is the time interval. In special relativity, however, the equation takes into account the effects of time dilation and the constancy of the speed of light, resulting in a slightly different equation.

5. Is the equation for deriving velocity from acceleration in special relativity applicable in all reference frames?

Yes, the equation v = u + at is applicable in all inertial reference frames, which are frames of reference in which an object is either at rest or moving at a constant velocity. This is a fundamental principle of special relativity, known as the principle of relativity.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
23
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
858
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
20
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
22
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
987
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
29
Views
1K
Back
Top