Can Total Energy Be Less Than Rest Energy in Special Relativity?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the question of whether an object's total energy can be less than its rest energy in the context of special relativity. Participants explore the implications of this question, considering both massive and massless particles, and delve into the mathematical relationships governing energy and velocity.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant states that it is impossible for an object's total energy to be less than its rest energy, citing the energy-momentum relation.
  • Another participant questions whether a mathematical solution for velocity exists, even if it leads to a negative value, suggesting that the total energy (rest energy plus kinetic energy) must be less than the rest energy.
  • A participant provides equations for total energy and rest energy, proposing to find a velocity such that total energy is less than rest energy.
  • Further discussion introduces the concept of gamma (γ) and its relationship to velocity, indicating that for massive particles, γ is always greater than 1.
  • One participant discusses tachyons, suggesting that if total energy were to be defined for particles with imaginary mass, it would require different definitions for momentum, rest energy, and total energy.
  • There is a suggestion that if particles could travel faster than light, it might lead to a scenario where total energy could be less than rest energy, although this remains unverified.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the possibility of total energy being less than rest energy, with some asserting it is impossible while others explore hypothetical scenarios involving tachyons and velocities greater than the speed of light.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes unresolved mathematical steps and assumptions regarding the definitions of energy and mass, particularly in relation to tachyons and hypothetical faster-than-light particles.

tkav1980
Messages
47
Reaction score
1
Ok here's the short story. A friend of mine is in grad school for physics. I have a BS in physics, however i graduated in 2002 and haven't used anything i learned as i don't work in the field. I always try to think up questions to stump him. This time he got me. Here's what he asked me. In special relativity, At what speed does an object need to travel for its Total energy to be less than its resting energy. This one is way out of my league at this point.

If i posted this in the wrong place i apologige.

p.s. i asked him about the object having zero mass and didnt get a response.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
tkav1980 said:
In special relativity, At what speed does an object need to travel for its Total energy to be less than its resting energy

Impossible.
[tex]E^2=m^2c^4 +p^2 c^2=E_0 ^2 + (pc)^2 \implies E \geq E_0[/tex]
 
Nabeshin said:
Impossible.
[tex][/tex]

But i don't see a solution for velocity? Even if that number was a negative number wouldn't there be at least a value that could be assigned. Sorry if I am annoying I've been at work a long time at this point in my day. The brain shut off, but from my understanding of what he asked the total energy of the particle ( the rest energy plus the kenetic energy) must be less than it's rest energy. wouldn't there be a solution in terms of velocity. at least a way to mathmatically solve for it weather the answer is real or imaginary?
 
Last edited:
tkav1980 said:
Ok here's the short story. A friend of mine is in grad school for physics. I have a BS in physics, however i graduated in 2002 and haven't used anything i learned as i don't work in the field. I always try to think up questions to stump him. This time he got me. Here's what he asked me. In special relativity, At what speed does an object need to travel for its Total energy to be less than its resting energy. This one is way out of my league at this point.

If i posted this in the wrong place i apologige.

p.s. i asked him about the object having zero mass and didnt get a response.

[tex]TE=\frac{m_0c^2}{\sqrt{1-(v/c)^2}}[/tex]
[tex]RE=m_0c^2[/tex]

Find [tex]v[/tex] such that [tex]TE<RE[/tex] :-)
 
tkav1980 said:
But i don't see a solution for velocity? Even if that number was a negative number wouldn't there be at least a value that could be assigned. Sorry if I am annoying I've been at work a long time at this point in my day. The brain shut off, but from my understanding of what he asked the total energy of the particle ( the rest energy plus the kenetic energy) must be less than it's rest energy. wouldn't there be a solution in terms of velocity. at least a way to mathmatically solve for it weather the answer is real or imaginary?
In units such that c=1, we have [itex]E=\gamma m -m[/itex], where E is the kinetic energy, [itex]\gamma m[/itex] is the total energy, and m is the rest energy. You're looking for a velocity v such that [itex]\gamma m< m[/itex]. This is equivalent to [itex]\gamma<1[/itex], but

[tex]\gamma=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-v^2}}>1[/tex]

However, all of the above is for massive particles...and by that I mean particles with mass m>0.

Every particle satisfies an equation of the form [itex]-E^2+p^2=A[/itex]. If [itex]A\leq 0[/itex], we write [itex]A=-m^2[/itex], where m is defined to be >0, and is called the "mass" of the particle. If we insist on writing [itex]A=-m^2[/itex] even when A>0 (which would be appropriate if we intend to call m the "mass"), m must be imaginary. These particles are called tachyons.

It's a bit more convenient to write [itex]A=n^2[/itex], where n=im>0. The equation that we would write as [itex]E^2=p^2+m^2[/itex] for massive particles would be written as [itex]E^2=p^2-n^2[/itex]. I haven't really thought about how to define momentum, rest energy or total energy for tachyons, but it's clear that these are the things you need to work out if you're going to really answer the question.

The really short answer is of course v>c (if it's possible at all...I haven't verified that it is), but the answer isn't complete without the appropriate definitions.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
3K
  • · Replies 102 ·
4
Replies
102
Views
7K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
8K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K