Best Way to measure Relativistic Rocket Acceleration?

  • Thread starter tade
  • Start date
  • #1
552
18
Someday, mankind will be able to construct rockets that can move at relativistic speeds.

The acceleration is given by ##a=\frac{F_0}{γ^3m_0}##

##F_0## can be easily measured by placing a force gauge on the rocket itself.

The acceleration is much harder to measure, is has to be measured in a frame in which the rocket is zipping past at relativistic speeds.


What efficient methods to measure the acceleration can you think of?

My idea is placing a camera far away from the rocket's path and taking snapshots of it to see how its position evolves over time.

But we also have to consider tricky relativistic optics.
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
BvU
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
14,401
3,713
The acceleration
The ?

And what would ##\gamma## be in this expression ?

I expect it's a lot easier to measure a Doppler shift and differentiate. Leaving cameras all over the place doesn't sound efficient.
 
  • #3
552
18
And what would ##\gamma## be in this expression ?
The Lorentz factor? based on the speed of the rocket
 
  • #4
BvU
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
14,401
3,713
I know. But it's relative to something...
 
  • #5
552
18
I know. But it's relative to something...
relative to the frame which you are in, making the measurements.
 
  • #6
BvU
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
14,401
3,713
Yeah, I looked it up . It's the expression for transformation of acceleration between two inertial frames. Have to let it sink in to understand whether it's necessarily between two inertial frames or can be applied within a non-inertial frame as well. Somewhat above my pay grade (experimentalist). @Orodruin ?
 
  • #7
Orodruin
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
17,166
6,973
Force in the conventional sense is not very well defined in SR. From your post, it would seem that you are using ##F_0## to be the force in the instantaneous rest frame, which would make ##F_0/m_0## equal to the proper acceleration. Your formula will then generally depend on whether or not you are accelerating in the direction of motion or not.

It is unclear to me what you want to use this for. Acceleration is easily accessible in any frame. As you say, just observe the position as a function of time an account for the travel time of light.
 
  • Like
Likes QuantumQuest
  • #8
552
18
Force in the conventional sense is not very well defined in SR. From your post, it would seem that you are using ##F_0## to be the force in the instantaneous rest frame, which would make ##F_0/m_0## equal to the proper acceleration. Your formula will then generally depend on whether or not you are accelerating in the direction of motion or not.

It is unclear to me what you want to use this for. Acceleration is easily accessible in any frame. As you say, just observe the position as a function of time an account for the travel time of light.
Yup, all the vectors are pointing in the same direction. Just linear acceleration.

Yes, that's what I said, now I need a good way to practically and experimentally carry it out. Ideas for the near future perhaps.

Engineers will have to test the relativistic performances of rockets and spaceships in the future.
 
  • #9
Orodruin
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
17,166
6,973
It is still unclear what you wish to accomplish. This has already been well tested in particle accelerators.

Relativistic space ships of macroscopic size are not a near future thing.

Furthermore, you cannot neglect mass losses if you use a rocket to generate thrust and wish to reach relativistic velocities.
 
  • #10
552
18
It is still unclear what you wish to accomplish. This has already been well tested in particle accelerators.

Relativistic space ships of macroscopic size are not a near future thing.

Furthermore, you cannot neglect mass losses if you use a rocket to generate thrust and wish to reach relativistic velocities.
Yes, but the rockets still have to be tested after they have been built. I'm just wondering what methods future engineers might use to accomplish the task of tracking a relativistic rocket's position. Something efficient and as cheap as possible.

Ok, maybe the far future then. Does near-future mean in about 50 years time to you?

Certainly we can take into account the rocket's changing mass.
 
  • #11
Orodruin
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
17,166
6,973
Does near-future mean in about 50 years time to you?

Barring unexpected giant advancements you will not see macroscopic relativistic rockets in the next 200 years. Have you taken the time to compute what portion of a rocket's mass must be converted into thrust in order for it to reach relativistic velocity? It is humongous.
 
  • #12
552
18
Barring unexpected giant advancements you will not see macroscopic relativistic rockets in the next 200 years. Have you taken the time to compute what portion of a rocket's mass must be converted into thrust in order for it to reach relativistic velocity? It is humongous.
Do you have any link regarding that? Not that I don't believe you.

Anyway, this thread is less about rocket energy and more about tracking position.
 
  • #13
Orodruin
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
17,166
6,973
Do you have any link regarding that? Not that I don't believe you.

Anyway, this thread is less about rocket energy and more about tracking position.
The 200 years is a personal lower estimate. I would be surprised if it happened at all unless special relativity is fundamentally misguided for macroscopic objects - which we have no reason to believe.

The computation of the mass fraction needed to be ejected in order to reach relativistic velocities is a typical textbook exercise.
 
  • #14
552
18
The 200 years is a personal lower estimate. I would be surprised if it happened at all unless special relativity is fundamentally misguided for macroscopic objects - which we have no reason to believe.

The computation of the mass fraction needed to be ejected in order to reach relativistic velocities is a typical textbook exercise.
ok. but why do you think that it is impossible? someday we might find a way to harness enough energy.

and anyway for this thread I want to focus on tracking a rocket.
 
  • #15
Orodruin
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
17,166
6,973
ok. but why do you think that it is impossible? someday we might find a way to harness enough energy.
Because the energy required is essentially the entire starting mass of the rocket. It is not a matter of finding the energy, it is the ratio between total rocket mass and useful payload that will kill you. Never mind the useful payload if you ever want to decelerate to return to the original state of motion.


and anyway for this thread I want to focus on tracking a rocket.
You have much more pressing problems than relativistic optics then. For example, where does the illumination of the rocket come from and what frequency it will be observed at.
 

Related Threads on Best Way to measure Relativistic Rocket Acceleration?

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
309
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
979
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
2K
M
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
5K
Top