If two trains traveling at 0.5c collide head on

  • Thread starter CombustionMan
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Head Trains
In summary, the two trains are on the same tracks moving at constant velocities towards each other (0.5c --> and <--0.5c I guess) so what would happen? Since all motion is relative and no mass can travel at the speed of light something else must happen instead of a light speed head-on collision, right? I'm just curious.Since the relative velocity is below c, the two trains would not collide. However, there would be a very large explosion.
  • #1
CombustionMan
5
0
What would happen? These two trains are on the same tracks moving at constant velocities towards each other (0.5c --> and <--0.5c I guess) so what would happen? Since all motion is relative and no mass can travel at the speed of light something else must happen instead of a light speed head-on collision, right? I'm just curious.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The difficulty is in accepting that unlike at low velocities, where two objects moving at say 60mph are additive and so the relative velocity is 120mph, at speeds approaching c this is not the case.

The most a mass object could achieve would be something approaching a relative speed of 1c. There would be a very large explosion though and a lot of energy would be produced.

The Lorentz transforms explain it but essentially at significant fractions of light speed, the dilation of time and space means that relative velocities are always below 1c.

[itex]\ \gamma = \frac{1}{ \sqrt{1 - { \frac{v^2}{c^2}}}}[/itex]

Which leads to the composition of velocities equation:

Where 2 moving bodies are w and v

291bfd8042576ef4c34fb191693e72c0.png


Best way to imagine it is to try and understand what time and motion dilation means, distance and time are equivalently dilated by motions that approach significant fractions of c, so that the relative concerns mean that they are effectively traveling through time space that is becoming "stretched" and hence the relative motion of mass objects becomes more dilated as they near velocities approaching c until the dilation itself prevents anything with mass achieving this limit. Probably not a very good explanation but meh.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
I think I understand, so since they are traveling through "stretched" time their relative velocities go below 1c?
 
  • #4
The formula for the relative speeds of two objects moving toward each other with speeds (relative to a third observer) of u and v i s NOT "u+ v". The speed of each relative to the other will be
[tex]\frac{u+ v}{1+ \frac{uv}{c^2}}[/tex]

In particular, if [itex]u= v= c/2[/itex], then the speed of either one relative to the other is
[tex]\frac{\frac{c}{2}+ \frac{c}{2}}{1+ \frac{\frac{c}{2}\frac{c}{2}}{c^2}}= \frac{\frac{c}{2}}{1+ \frac{1}{4}}= \frac{4}{5}c[/tex]
 
  • #5
CombustionMan said:
I think I understand, so since they are traveling through "stretched" time their relative velocities go below 1c?

Yup pretty much although it's stretched time and space, space-time. You can play with Ivy's equations yourself to show that speeds always approach c just by plugging some numbers in.

It's more interesting if you take the case of .999c and then you would imagine the relative velocities are 1.998c which is clearly impossible but again just plugging the numbers in the dilation effects conserve c as a limit.

Interestingly we can observe this with GPS satellites, since the gravitation in space is slightly lower than on Earth and the relative speeds although far slower than c become significant over time. Without adjustments they can go out of synch fairly significantly in quite short periods of time. So to adjust for it they lower the frequency of clocks so that they take account of the respective dilation effects.

They have also placed Caesium clocks on tall buildings and flown them around the world to show extremely small variations that are predicted by the theory.
 
Last edited:

1. How does the speed of the trains affect the collision?

The speed of the trains, which is 0.5 times the speed of light (c), is a significant factor in this collision. At this speed, the trains are moving at half the speed of light, meaning they are travelling at an extremely high velocity. This will result in a very high energy collision, which could potentially cause significant damage.

2. What would happen to the passengers on board the trains?

The passengers on board the trains would experience a sudden and violent impact as the trains collide at high speeds. The force of the collision would likely cause injuries, and depending on the safety measures in place, could potentially be fatal for some passengers.

3. How would the collision impact the tracks and surrounding area?

The impact of the collision would cause significant damage to the tracks and surrounding area. The high speed and force of the trains will likely result in derailed cars, damaged tracks, and potentially even damage to nearby structures.

4. What would happen to the trains after the collision?

The trains would likely be severely damaged or destroyed after the collision. The high-speed impact would cause the trains to crumple and potentially even break apart. The damage could also result in a fire or explosion, depending on the type of trains and their cargo.

5. Is it possible for the trains to survive the collision intact?

At 0.5 times the speed of light, it is highly unlikely that the trains would survive the collision intact. The high speed and force of the impact would cause severe damage to the trains, and it is unlikely that any part of them would remain undamaged.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
21
Views
613
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
943
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
60
Views
3K
Replies
66
Views
7K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
61
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
12
Views
808
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
52
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top