4-velocity, the mass shell and potential energy

pellman
Messages
683
Reaction score
6
4-velocity, the "mass shell" and potential energy

For a free relativistic particle we have the condition

E^2-\mathbf{p}^2c^2=m^2c^4.

putting p^0 = c^{-1}E we may write this as

p^\mu p_\mu = m^2c^2

And since p^\mu = m\frac{dx^\mu}{d\tau} = mu^\mu we may express the same condition as

u^\mu u_\mu = c^2

At least, this is true for a free particle. Is this condition affected by the presence of a potential?

In the presence of a potential A^\mu the momentum-energy relation becomes

(p^\mu-A^\mu)(p_\mu-A_\mu) = m^2c^2

doesn't it? But then in that case, we are talking about the canonical momentum and we no longer have p^\mu = mu^\mu. But is p^\mu = mu^\mu+A^\mu? So that we still have u^\mu u_\mu = c^2? Can't find this in my texts and just wanted someone to confirm I understand it correctly.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Always, u^\mu u_\mu = c^2. Mechanical momentum is m times that. Canonical momentum is determined from what the Lagrangian of the system is.
 
pellman said:
For a free relativistic particle we have the condition

E^2-\mathbf{p}^2c^2=m^2c^4.

putting p^0 = c^{-1}E we may write this as

p^\mu p_\mu = m^2c^2

And since p^\mu = m\frac{dx^\mu}{d\tau} = mu^\mu we may express the same condition as

u^\mu u_\mu = c^2

At least, this is true for a free particle. Is this condition affected by the presence of a potential?

In the presence of a potential A^\mu the momentum-energy relation becomes

(p^\mu-A^\mu)(p_\mu-A_\mu) = m^2c^2

doesn't it? But then in that case, we are talking about the canonical momentum and we no longer have p^\mu = mu^\mu. But is p^\mu = mu^\mu+A^\mu? So that we still have u^\mu u_\mu = c^2? Can't find this in my texts and just wanted someone to confirm I understand it correctly.

If you look in Jackson's text Classical Electrodynamics you will find something very close.

Pete
 
Thanks, guys.
 
I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
Thread 'Dirac's integral for the energy-momentum of the gravitational field'
See Dirac's brief treatment of the energy-momentum pseudo-tensor in the attached picture. Dirac is presumably integrating eq. (31.2) over the 4D "hypercylinder" defined by ##T_1 \le x^0 \le T_2## and ##\mathbf{|x|} \le R##, where ##R## is sufficiently large to include all the matter-energy fields in the system. Then \begin{align} 0 &= \int_V \left[ ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g}\, \right]_{,\nu} d^4 x = \int_{\partial V} ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g} \, dS_\nu \nonumber\\ &= \left(...
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
Back
Top