A simple problem of conservation of momentum

epovo
Messages
114
Reaction score
21
Trying to understand the conservation of relativistic momentum, I thought of this problem.
It's very simple, and possibly my mistake is embarrassing so I apologize in advance :blushing:

Two particles of identical mass m and speeds v and -v in some frame S collide inelastically and they stop. The relativistic momentum in S is zero all the time.
Now, in system S' moving at -v, the initial momentum should be

p = m v' / √(1-v'2/c2) [1]

where v' is the velocity of the other particle in S'

v' = 2v / (1+v2/c2) [2]

if I substitute [2] into [1] I can get the momentum before impact as a function of v. After some manipulation I get

p = 2mv / (1 - v2/c2)

But the momentum in S' after the impact is that of a particle of mass 2m moving with speed v. So its momentum should be

p = 2mv / √(1 - v2/c2))

so - where did I go wrong?
Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The easiest way to handle these types of problems is through the conservation of the four-momentum. Here is a wikipedia page on four-momentum: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-momentum

Using units where c=1 the four-momentum of the particles in S are:
##P_1=(\gamma m, \gamma m v, 0, 0)##
##P_2=(\gamma m, -\gamma m v, 0, 0)##
where ##\gamma=1/\sqrt{1-v^2}##

The four-momentum is conserved, so after the collision we have:
##P_3=P_1+P_2=(\gamma 2 m,0,0,0)##
Note that the mass after the collision is ##m_3=|P_3|=\gamma 2 m## so the mass of the combined particle is greater than the sum of the masses of the original particles! This is the key part that you missed by doing it the long way rather than using four-vectors.

Now, in frame S' we have:
##P_1=((2\gamma^2-1)m, 2mv\gamma^2,0,0)##
##P_2=(m,0,0,0)##
##P_3=(2 m \gamma^2, 2 m v \gamma^2,0,0)##
Note that the rest mass after the collision is again ##m_3=|P_3|=\gamma 2 m##
 
Of course! I forgot about the increased rest mass because of the energy-mass conservation principle... That's where my missing γ went!
I will start using four-momentum but actually this mistake has helped me understand things better.
Thank you very much
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...
Back
Top