How to Calculate the Limit of Fraction Involving Four Vectors with q --> 0

In summary: So the square root is imaginary. In summary, the limit of the given fraction as q --> 0 can be simplified to -p0p2/(-p0 ± √(p02 - p2)), where p and q are four-vectors with pq = pμqν and the sign under the square root may be imaginary. The result may vary depending on the chosen coordinate system.
  • #1
parton
83
1
I should calculate the limit of the following fraction

[tex] \dfrac{- (pq) p^{2}}{-pq \pm \sqrt{(pq)^{2} - p^{2} q^{2}}} [/tex].

with q --> 0, but I don't know how to do that.

p and q are two four-vectors, so we have: [tex] pq = p_{\mu} q^{\mu} [/tex] and so on.

Does anyone have an idea? Or at least: Is it somehow possible to "simplify" or rewrite the expression in the limit q --> 0 ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
parton said:
I should calculate the limit of the following fraction

[tex] \dfrac{- (pq) p^{2}}{-pq \pm \sqrt{(pq)^{2} - p^{2} q^{2}}} [/tex].

with q --> 0, but I don't know how to do that.

p and q are two four-vectors, so we have: [tex] pq = p_{\mu} q^{\mu} [/tex] and so on.

Does anyone have an idea? Or at least: Is it somehow possible to "simplify" or rewrite the expression in the limit q --> 0 ?

Hi parton! :smile:

If we're letting q --> 0, then we may as well put q = (a,0,0,0) and let a --> 0.

Then it's -ap0p2/(-ap0 ± √(a2p02 - a2p2)), = -p0p2/(-p0 ± √(p02 - p2)),

which I think is m2/(1 ± v).

But I expect the result is different if q --> 0 along some other path.
 
  • #3
parton said:
I should calculate the limit of the following fraction

[tex] \dfrac{- (pq) p^{2}}{-pq \pm \sqrt{(pq)^{2} - p^{2} q^{2}}} [/tex].

with q --> 0, but I don't know how to do that.

p and q are two four-vectors, so we have: [tex] pq = p_{\mu} q^{\mu} [/tex] and so on.

Does anyone have an idea? Or at least: Is it somehow possible to "simplify" or rewrite the expression in the limit q --> 0 ?

I would like to see a general solution to this as well. I poked at it but nothing immediately jumped out at me. The general solution must determine how [tex] -pq [/tex] compares to [tex]\sqrt{(pq)^{2} - p^{2} q^{2}}} [/tex] as q-->0. It's not obvious to me that the latter approaches zero any order "faster" so the ratio [tex] \dfrac{- (pq) }{ \sqrt{(pq)^{2} - p^{2} q^{2}}} [/tex] must approach some constant, but does that constant depend on q's path?

I'm guessing there is either some nice identity that you can use if you expand it all out OR you may have to use some differentials to eventually end up with [tex] A p^{2}[/tex] where A is some constant.

Although, if the answer really is path independent, then choosing your favorite path might be the way to go like tiny-tim suggested!
 
  • #4
parton said:
I should calculate the limit of the following fraction

[tex] \dfrac{- (pq) p^{2}}{-pq \pm \sqrt{(pq)^{2} - p^{2} q^{2}}} [/tex].

with q --> 0, but I don't know how to do that.

p and q are two four-vectors, so we have: [tex] pq = p_{\mu} q^{\mu} [/tex] and so on.

Does anyone have an idea? Or at least: Is it somehow possible to "simplify" or rewrite the expression in the limit q --> 0 ?

I think you can do this without loss of generality by choosing a coordinate system where q = (a,0,0,0), like tiny-tim suggested. Then [tex](pq)^2 = (p_0a)^2[/tex], and [tex]p^2 q^2 = p^2 a^2[/tex], so then you have

[tex]\frac{ -p_0 a p^2}{-p_0a \pm \sqrt{a^2(p_0^2 - p^2)}}[/tex]

The a's can now be canceled out to give

[tex]\frac{ -p_0 p^2}{-p_0 \pm \sqrt{p_0^2 - p^2}}[/tex]

In another coordinate system, you would interpret [tex]p_0[/tex] as the component of p that points in the direction of q. I'm a bit surprised at the sign under the square root, since you should have [tex]p^2 \ge p_0^2[/tex], so maybe I've screwed something up; it's been a whiel since I worked with 4-vectors.
 
  • #5
kanato said:
...I'm a bit surprised at the sign under the square root, since you should have [tex]p^2 \ge p_0^2[/tex], so maybe I've screwed something up; it's been a whiel since I worked with 4-vectors.

Everything is OK: p2=m2 but p02>m2.
 

Related to How to Calculate the Limit of Fraction Involving Four Vectors with q --> 0

1. What are four vectors?

Four vectors are mathematical constructs used in physics to describe the properties of objects in four-dimensional spacetime. They consist of four components: three spatial components and one temporal component.

2. What is the significance of four vectors in physics?

Four vectors are important in physics because they allow us to describe the behavior of objects and events in a consistent and relativistic manner. They are particularly useful in special relativity, where time and space are treated as a unified four-dimensional construct.

3. What is the problem with four vectors?

The problem with four vectors arises from the fact that they are not invariant under all transformations. In other words, the components of a four vector may change when we change our frame of reference, making it difficult to compare and analyze them.

4. How do scientists address the problem with four vectors?

Scientists address the problem with four vectors by using a more general mathematical construct called tensors. Tensors are similar to four vectors, but they are invariant under all transformations, making them more suitable for describing physical phenomena.

5. Can four vectors still be useful despite their limitations?

Yes, four vectors can still be useful in many cases, especially in special relativity. By carefully choosing the frame of reference and considering the physical situation, scientists can still make accurate predictions and use four vectors to describe the behavior of objects and events in four-dimensional spacetime.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Physics
Replies
31
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
563
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
627
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
821
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • Calculus
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
860
Back
Top