Derivation of relativistic acceleration and momentum

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of relativistic acceleration and momentum, exploring both theoretical aspects and mathematical formulations. Participants engage in technical explanations, propose different approaches, and clarify concepts related to relativistic mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants present the equation for relativistic mass as \( m = \gamma m_0 \) and discuss its implications for force and momentum.
  • Others argue that Newton's second law can be expressed in relativistic terms, suggesting \( F = dp/dt \) and providing a form of the relativistic momentum equation.
  • A participant mentions that the derivation of acceleration must consider the vector nature of force and velocity, indicating that additional terms arise when vectors are involved.
  • There is a discussion about the validity of certain results being applicable only when force is parallel to velocity, with some participants emphasizing the need for implicit differentiation in the derivation process.
  • One participant challenges the existence of relativistic mass, suggesting that mainstream theory may not support this view, while another participant questions the definition of "mainstream theory."
  • A question is raised regarding the effects of time dilation on acceleration, specifically whether acceleration should decrease proportionately due to the square of time dilation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the derivation of relativistic acceleration and momentum, with no clear consensus reached. Some agree on the forms of equations presented, while others contest the interpretations and implications of relativistic mass and force.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that certain derivations may depend on the assumptions made about the nature of mass and force in relativistic contexts. There are also indications that some mathematical steps remain unresolved or require further clarification.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and professionals in physics, particularly those focused on relativistic mechanics, as well as anyone seeking to understand the complexities of force and acceleration in relativistic contexts.

phys23
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Dear all,

could anyone please show the full derivation of relativistic acceleration and momentum.

Many thanks n
happy eqtns
R
 
Physics news on Phys.org
phys23 said:
Dear all,

could anyone please show the full derivation of relativistic acceleration and momentum.

Many thanks n
happy eqtns
R
Welcome to PF,

Have you tried searching the internet?
 
In relativity, mass is dependent of velocity such that,
m=\gamma m_0=\frac{m_0}{\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}}.
m_0[/tex] is the mass of the object at rest, c is the 299 792 458 m/s.<br /> Most equations still hold true in relativity, the major exception being F=ma.<br /> The following are still true:<br /> p=mv, F=p&amp;#039;, a=v&amp;#039;, v=x&amp;#039;.<br /> Using these, we easily find that,<br /> p=\frac{m_0v}{\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}}<br /> and<br /> F=p&amp;#039;=(mv)&amp;#039;=m&amp;#039;v+v&amp;#039;m.<br /> Now we need to express m&#039; in terms of only v.<br /> m&amp;#039;=\left(\frac{m_0}{\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}}\right)&amp;#039;=\frac{-1/2m_0}{(1-v^2/c^2)^{3/2}}(-2v/c^2)(v&amp;#039;)=v\frac{m_0v&amp;#039;}{c^2(1-v^2/c^2)^{3/2}}.<br /> Combining this with the above equation for force,<br /> F=v^2\frac{m_0v&amp;#039;}{c^2(1-v^2/c^2)^{3/2}}+\frac{m_0v&amp;#039;}{\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}}.<br /> Now you can just factor and solve for a, v&amp;#039;.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jan Nebec
You result is for parallel to v. With vectors, there are other terms.
 
Newton's second law F/m = a Also recall a = dv/dt Also force is related to relativistic momentum by F = dp/dt
Relativistic momentum is defined by p = mv(1 - v^2/c^2)^-.5 You need to use implicit derivation to take the derivative of this with respect to t. Thus you should have dp/dt and dv/dt term. Once you are finished getting the derivative and combining terms you should end up with dv/dt = F(1-v^2/c^2)^3/2 /m
 
F=ma does work in both SR and GR as long as you are using the 4-vector (tensorial) version.
 
genesis1 said:
Newton's second law F/m = a Also recall a = dv/dt Also force is related to relativistic momentum by F = dp/dt
Relativistic momentum is defined by p = mv(1 - v^2/c^2)^-.5 You need to use implicit derivation to take the derivative of this with respect to t. Thus you should have dp/dt and dv/dt term. Once you are finished getting the derivative and combining terms you should end up with dv/dt = F(1-v^2/c^2)^3/2 /m
That result is only valid for a parallel to v.
 
clem said:
You result is for parallel to v. With vectors, there are other terms.
Yes, the actual equation is (gamma)ma=(F-F.v/c)v/c as i mentioned in the new thread. What I am waiting for is its dervn
 
vin300 said:
Yes, the actual equation is (gamma)ma=(F-F.v/c)v/c as i mentioned in the new thread. What I am waiting for is its dervn
Use the fact that
v\frac{dv}{dt}=\vec{v}\cdot \vec{a}
 
  • #10
gamesguru said:
Use the fact that
v\frac{dv}{dt}=\vec{v}\cdot \vec{a}
do it
 
  • #11
vin300 said:
do it
If you carry out the same calculations I did in the first post I made in this thread, but use vectors, you get this result (you can do it yourself, it's very easy, esp. since I already did it):
\vec{F}=m_o \vec{v}\frac{d\gamma}{dt}+m_o\gamma\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}
and using my above post,
\frac{d\gamma}{dt}=\gamma^3\frac{|\vec{a}||\vec{v}|}{c^2},
\vec{F}=m_o\gamma^3\vec{v}\frac{|\vec{a}||\vec{v}|}{c^2}+m_o\gamma \vec{a}=m_o\gamma^3\vec{v}\frac{\vec{a}\cdot \vec{v}}{c^2}+m_o\gamma \vec{a}
So,
m_o\gamma\vec{a}=\vec{F}-[(m_o\gamma^3\vec{a})\cdot\frac{\vec{v}}{c}]\frac{\vec{v}}{c}.
According to your author, the following must be true,
m_o\gamma^3\vec{a}=\vec{F}.
This suggests relativistic mass does not exist and that this author goes against mainstream theory. The only guy I know who goes against this is Levvy. We don't like to trust that guy around here. (Read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_in_special_relativity#Controversy)

I wouldn't trust this author if I were you, only if you assume relativistic mass does not exist do you get the result you posted.
 
  • #12
As I just posted in the other thread, dotting your m\gamma a equation with v
shows the result v.F=m\gamma^3(v.a).
Either you or I are confused about what "mainstream theory" is.
 
  • #13
So I've been told that the speed of light remains constant despite length contraction and dime dilation because they each decrease proportionately. So a velocity of 4 meters/2 seconds in a relativistic scenario might see a halving of values of length and time so it may only traverse 2 meters but only 1 second of time elapses. My question is what happens with acceleration if it is measured in distance per time-squared...Shouldn't it decrease proportionately to square root-t? If time dilates, shouldn't time-squared dilate even more? Or is this too linear of an approach?
 
  • #14
phys23 said:
Dear all,

could anyone please show the full derivation of relativistic acceleration and momentum.

Many thanks n
happy eqtns
R

a \equiv \frac{d^2x}{dt^2}

p \equiv \frac{\partial L}{\partial v}

with L the relativistic Lagrangian and v velocity
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
28
Views
5K