Prove rectilinear motion given four-acceleration and four-velocity?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter learningphysics
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that a particle undergoing four-acceleration and four-velocity exhibits rectilinear motion, as posed in a problem from Rindler's "Introduction to Special Relativity." Participants explore theoretical aspects of the problem, including integration techniques and properties of four-vectors.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant integrates the equation \(\frac{dA}{d\tau} = \alpha^2 U\) and derives \(A = \alpha^2 x^i\), expressing uncertainty about the next steps.
  • Another participant suggests using the dot product \(U \cdot A = 0\) to further analyze the relationship between four-acceleration and four-velocity.
  • A participant discusses the implications of rectilinear motion in terms of spacetime diagrams, noting that motion must lie on a plane spanned by the timelike four-velocity and spacelike four-acceleration.
  • Concerns are raised about the assumption that \(\alpha\) is constant, with a participant referencing Rindler's text for clarification.
  • One participant proposes an alternative approach to demonstrate rectilinear motion by showing that velocity is parallel to acceleration at all times in an inertial frame, using a pseudo-inductive argument.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the assumptions required to prove rectilinear motion, particularly regarding the constancy of \(\alpha\) and the conditions under which velocity and acceleration are parallel. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing approaches presented.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note limitations in their understanding of bivectors and the implications of the derived equations, indicating that further clarification may be needed to fully grasp the problem's requirements.

learningphysics
Homework Helper
Messages
4,097
Reaction score
7
I've been struggling with this problem from Rindler's "INtroduction to Special Relativity"...

given a particle that has :
[tex]\frac{dA}{d\tau} = {\alpha}^2 U[/tex] where A is four-acceleration and U is four velocity... using integration prove that this implies rectilinear motion.

If I integrate both sides and set the constant of integration equal to zero I get:

[tex]A = {\alpha}^2 x^i[/tex]

I don't know where to go from here. I'd appreciate any help.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Can you proceed knowing that the dot-product of these four-vectors is [tex]U\cdot A =0[/tex]?
 
robphy said:
Can you proceed knowing that the dot-product of these four-vectors is [tex]U\cdot A =0[/tex]?

Yes, definitely.
 
learningphysics said:
I've been struggling with this problem from Rindler's "INtroduction to Special Relativity"...

given a particle that has :
[tex]\frac{dA}{d\tau} = {\alpha}^2 U[/tex] where A is four-acceleration and U is four velocity... using integration prove that this implies rectilinear motion.

If I integrate both sides and set the constant of integration equal to zero I get:

[tex]A = {\alpha}^2 x^i[/tex]

I don't know where to go from here. I'd appreciate any help.

Ok... from here I can say:

[tex]A \cdot U = (\alpha^2 x^i) \cdot U[/tex]

then
[tex]0 = \alpha^2 x^i \cdot \frac{dx^i}{d\tau}[/tex]

[tex]0 = x^i \cdot \frac{dx^i}{d\tau}[/tex]

[tex]0 = \frac{1}{2} \frac{d}{d\tau}(x^i \cdot x^i)[/tex]

[tex]0 = \frac{d}{d\tau}(x^i \cdot x^i)[/tex]

[tex]K = x^i \cdot x^i[/tex] where K is a constant

taking c=1, and doing the dot product and replacing K with -K:

[tex]x^2 + y^2 + z^2 - t^2 = K[/tex]

Can the above equation be used to show that the object is moving in a straight line?
 
Last edited:
It's pretty late... so, I'm not 100% sure about this. See if this makes sense.

Rectilinear motion means that the particle travels along a straight line in space. That is, there is no "turning in space". On a spacetime diagram, this means that the motion must lie on a plane... the plane spanned by the timelike 4-velocity [tex]U^a[/tex] and the [necessarily spacelike*] 4-acceleration [tex]A^a[/tex]. (*Why? Since [tex]1=U^aU_a[/tex], then [tex]0=\displaystyle\frac{d}{d\tau}(U^aU_a)=2U^a\frac{d}{d\tau}U_a=2U^aA_a[/tex])

So, to ensure that motion lies on this spacetime plane, we should require that
the bivector [tex]U^{[a}A^{b]}=\frac{1}{2}(U^{a}A^{b}-U^{b}A^{a})[/tex] (similar to a cross product) is constant during the motion... that is, [tex]\displaystyle\frac{d}{d\tau}(U^{[a}A^{b]})=0[/tex].

Let's calculate
[tex]\begin{align*}<br /> \displaystyle\frac{d}{d\tau}(U^{[a}A^{b]})<br /> &=\displaystyle U^{[a}\left(\frac{d}{d\tau}A^{b]}\right)+<br /> \left(\frac{d}{d\tau}U^{[a}\right)A^{b]}\\<br /> &=\displaystyle U^{[a}\left(\alpha^2 U^{b]}\right)+<br /> \left(A^{[a}\right)A^{b]}\\<br /> &\stackrel{\surd}{=} \alpha^2 0 + 0 <br /> \end{align*}[/tex]

Check for errors.

Oh... one more thing... as a variant of the above calculation
Let's calculate
[tex]\begin{align*}<br /> \displaystyle\frac{d}{d\tau}(U^{a}A_{a})<br /> &=\displaystyle U^{a}\left(\frac{d}{d\tau}A_{a}\right)+<br /> \left(\frac{d}{d\tau}U^{a}\right)A_{a}\\<br /> \displaystyle\frac{d}{d\tau}(0)<br /> &=\displaystyle U^{a}\left(\alpha^2 U_{a}\right)+<br /> \left(A^{a}\right)A_{a}\\<br /> 0&\stackrel{\surd}{=} \alpha^2 (1) + A^aA_a\\<br /> -\alpha^2 &=A^aA_a<br /> \end{align*}[/tex]
which says (again) that [tex]A^a[/tex] is spacelike (assuming [tex]\alpha^2>0[/tex]), but now we learn that [tex]\alpha[/tex] is the magnitude of this spacelike [tex]A^a[/tex].

I just took a peek at my copy of Rindler, which suggests that [tex]\alpha[/tex] must actually be constant, which was not assumed anywhere above. But now, we can prove this starting from the given
[tex]\begin{align*}<br /> \frac{dA^a}{d\tau} &= {\alpha}^2 U^a\\<br /> A_a \frac{dA^a}{d\tau} &= A_a{\alpha}^2 U^a\\<br /> \frac{1}{2}\frac{d }{d\tau} (A_aA^a) &= {\alpha}^2 (A_aU^a)\\<br /> \frac{d}{d\tau}(A_aA^a) &= 0\\<br /> A_aA^a &\stackrel{\surd}{=} \mbox{constant}\\<br /> \end{align*}[/tex]

Ok, now it's time to sleep. :zzz:
 
Last edited:
Hi robphy. Thanks so much for your help!

In that problem Rindler asks to show that given that given:

[tex]\frac{dA}{d\tau} = \alpha^2 U[/tex] ([tex]\alpha[/tex] not given as constant), show that the proper acceleration is constant and equal to [tex]\alpha[/tex].

I had no problem with those two parts. I believe I did exactly the same thing you did in the second and third parts of your posts.

Right afterwards Rindler says finally show by integration that the equation implies rectilinear motion. So it appears that showing that the magnitude of proper acceleration is constant is not enough to show rectilinear motion (at least in the context of the problem).

I will study the first part of your post which I really don't understand at the moment. I don't know about bivectors, so I can't verify. I really appreciate the time and effort you put into your post and helping me out. Thanks!
 
For anyone that's interested here's a different way I came up with to show rectilinear motion. Rectilinear motion means there is some inertial frame where the particle moves in a straight line. This amounts to showing that velocity // acceleration at all times in that frame.

[tex]A = {\alpha}^2 x^i[/tex]

From here, equating the space components of A and x^i we can say that:

s(t) = k1(t) u(t) + k2(t) a(t) [1]

s - displacement vector
u - velocity vector
a - acceleration vector

We can prove that if u(t1) // a(t1) at some time t1 then u(t) // a(t) for all t>t1

Assume u(t_k) // a(t_k) [2]

u(t_k + dt) = u(t_k) + dt a(t_k) [3]

by [2] and [3], u(t_k + dt) // u(t_k) [4]

by [1] and [2], s(t_k) // u(t_k) [5]

s(t_k + dt) = s(t_k) + dt u(t_k) [6]

by [5] and [6], s(t_k+dt) // s(t_k) [7]

by [4],[5] and [7], s(t_k+dt) // u(t_k+dt) [8]

and by [1] and [8], u(t_k + dt) // a(t_k + dt)

so I believe this pseudo inductive argument shows u(t)//a(t) for t>t1, and we can do the same thing for t<t1.

Finally, we need to see if there is a t1 when u(t1)//a(t1). We can satisfy this condition by picking an inertial frame where u=0 at some point in time. We can always pick such a frame. In any inertial frame where u=0 at some point in time, u//a at all times and so the object moves in a straight line.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
6K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K