Approaching the speed of light

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the phenomena observed when particles are accelerated to speeds very near that of light, particularly in the context of particle accelerators like the LHC. Participants explore the implications of Lorentz transformations and the concept of relativistic mass in high-speed scenarios.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion about the clarity of Lorentz transformations at speeds near light, suggesting that they may not be straightforward.
  • There is a discussion about the concept that as particles approach the speed of light, their mass increases rather than their speed, with references to relativistic mass definitions.
  • One participant mentions the equation F=γ³ma, indicating that acceleration decreases as speed increases, which prevents exceeding the speed of light.
  • Another participant introduces the concept of rapidity, explaining its relationship to velocity and how it approaches infinity as speed approaches the speed of light.
  • Some participants note the distinction between different definitions of relativistic mass, particularly in relation to the direction of force applied to the particles.
  • There is mention of how energy increases in the LHC does not significantly translate to an increase in velocity due to the already high speeds of the particles.
  • Participants discuss the implications of force direction on acceleration and the complexities that arise when forces are neither longitudinal nor transverse.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the clarity of Lorentz transformations or the definitions of relativistic mass, indicating multiple competing views and ongoing debate regarding these concepts.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the implications of relativistic mass and the effects of force direction on particle acceleration, highlighting the complexity of these topics in the context of special relativity.

ShayanJ
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
2,802
Reaction score
605
You know that in accelerators like LHC,particles are accelerated to speeds very near to that of light
I want to know what phenomenons are observed in such high speeds,because lorentz transformations don't seem very clear there
Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Shyan said:
I want to know what phenomenons are observed in such high speeds,because lorentz transformations don't seem very clear there

uhh? :confused:

they're perfectly clear there … that's exactly where they're designed for! :smile:

were there any particular phenomena you were thinking of?​
 
The point is,the numbers are so near to c and I just didn't think they're so straight forward
Also,I heard in an animation explaining about LHC,that the particles when are at a speed very near to that of light,if accelerated,won't increase speed but mass
I know about the mass increase during the acceleration from the first but the explanation seemded to suggest sth new
well,sorry for the nonsense question
 
As I recall, F=\gamma^3ma. You get less acceleration for the same force the faster the particle goes - obviously, because otherwise you could accelerate past light speed. One interpretation of that is that "mass increases as you get closer to the speed of light", defining a relativistic mass, m_r=\gamma^3m so that F=m_ra.

That explanation is quite popular because it plays well with the "modern physics is so weird!" narrative that has got built up. It doesn't get much love here; I suspect the reasons for that are twofold. One, p=\gamma mv (note, no cube), so here we would define a different relativistic mass. That would get confusing fast. Second, Einsteinian Relativity isn't just Newtonian Relativity with a couple of extra terms. It is dubious that defining a relativistic mass so that some of the equations look the same is at all helpful.

So, what happens in the LHC is that the particles' energy is increased, but as they are already doing near-lightspeed, this does not translate to much of a velocity increase. Then they collide and high-velocity low-mass particles have a chance to become low-velocity high-mass particles.
 
Last edited:
Hi Shyan! :smile:
Shyan said:
Also,I heard in an animation explaining about LHC,that the particles when are at a speed very near to that of light,if accelerated,won't increase speed but mass

The speed does increase slightly, but the mass increases more!

It's probably easiest to consider the rapidity

the rapidity increases steadily and towards infinity. :smile:

Rapidity is α, where tanhα = v/c, coshα = γ = 1/√(1 - v2/c2) (so tanh∞ = 1 = c/c, and infinite rapidity is speed c),

see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapidity
 
Ibix said:
As I recall, F=\gamma^3ma. You get less acceleration for the same force the faster the particle goes - obviously, because otherwise you could accelerate past light speed. One interpretation of that is that "mass increases as you get closer to the speed of light", defining a relativistic mass, m_r=\gamma^3m so that F=m_ra.

That explanation is quite popular because it plays well with the "modern physics is so weird!" narrative that has got built up. It doesn't get much love here; I suspect the reasons for that are twofold. One, p=\gamma mv (note, no cube), so here we would define a different relativistic mass. That would get confusing fast. Second, Einsteinian Relativity isn't just Newtonian Relativity with a couple of extra terms. It is dubious that defining a relativistic mass so that some of the equations look the same is at all helpful.

So, what happens in the LHC is that the particles' energy is increased, but as they are already doing near-lightspeed, this does not translate to much of a velocity increase. Then they collide and high-velocity low-mass particles have a chance to become low-velocity high-mass particles.

Here's a,I guess, more complete treatment
 
Ibix said:
As I recall, F=\gamma^3ma. You get less acceleration for the same force the faster the particle goes - obviously, because otherwise you could accelerate past light speed. One interpretation of that is that "mass increases as you get closer to the speed of light", defining a relativistic mass, m_r=\gamma^3m so that F=m_ra.

Which is of course different from the "relativistic mass" that most people know about, namely ##m_r = \gamma m##. The difference is in the direction of the force with respect to the particles's motion. The standard "relativistic mass" works if the force is perpendicular (transverse) to the motion. Your version works if the force is parallel (longitudinal) to the motion. Some early treatments of SR acknowledge both versions and call them "transverse mass" and "longitudinal mass."

If the force is neither longitudinal nor transverse, things get messy. The acceleration isn't even in the same direction as the force!
 
jtbell said:
Which is of course different from the "relativistic mass" that most people know about, namely ##m_r = \gamma m##. The difference is in the direction of the force with respect to the particles's motion. The standard "relativistic mass" works if the force is perpendicular (transverse) to the motion. Your version works if the force is parallel (longitudinal) to the motion. Some early treatments of SR acknowledge both versions and call them "transverse mass" and "longitudinal mass."

If the force is neither longitudinal nor transverse, things get messy. The acceleration isn't even in the same direction as the force!
Almost correct: m=γm0 is in SR only a function of speed, not of direction - in fact it replaced the unhandy "transverse mass" and "longitudinal mass" definitions. And of course, no definition can change the fact that for force under an angle, the acceleration is not in the same direction anymore. :-p

Anyway, it is indeed a "special" effect from high speeds that an additional energy increase results into more momentum at very little speed increase. The happy thing about momentum is that there is only one definition that includes the γ. :smile:
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K