Constant acceleration from accelerated observer's perspective

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the time it takes for an observer, Bob, to reach 50% of the speed of light under constant acceleration of approximately 10g from his own reference frame. Initial calculations suggested an implausibly short duration of about 2.5 weeks, prompting a reevaluation of the acceleration as perceived from Earth. The conversation highlights the complexities of relativistic physics, particularly the need to use hyperbolic functions to describe the motion of objects under constant proper acceleration. The concept of Rindler coordinates is introduced as a relevant framework for understanding this scenario. Overall, the thread emphasizes the intricacies of relativistic acceleration and the importance of accurate mathematical formulations.
Whovian
Messages
651
Reaction score
3
First, an unnecessary short introduction of why I'm asking this question in the first place. Due to some doubts about a certain plot device in a science-fiction novel, I'm trying to figure out how long it would take to accelerate someone to, say, 50% of the speed of light under constant acceleration from their own reference frame (for various reasons, I'm assuming about 10*g.) Due to this being a small ameteur project, I'll probably be using Wolfram Alpha.

In any case, I got the outrageously small answer of about 2.5 weeks, which doesn't sound even close to right to me. I think I've isolated my problem to how I formulate this in terms of acceleration as measured from Earth. If this bit's correct, yes, I'll post the rest of my work in a hope of others finding a minor mistake.

So, now for a formulation of the problem. Say Bob's in a spaceship and accelerating with acceleration ##100\ \dfrac{\mathrm{m}}{\mathrm{s}^2}\approx 10\cdot g## in his own reference frame. How long, measured in seconds from Earth, will it take for him to be moving at .5c with respect to Earth?

Now, after a large amount of squandering about with exhaust-based engines in which the exhaust has mass << the spaceship which resulted in very ugly expressions for momentum (##\dfrac{1\ \mathrm{m}^3\cdot\delta\cdot\frac{v-r}{1-\frac{v\cdot r}{c^2}}}{\sqrt{1-\left(\frac{\frac{v-r}{1-\frac{v\cdot r}{c^2}}}{c}\right)^2}}##, for instance,) I decided to stop and just come out with what my intuition told me the acceleration as measured from Earth is, which is ##100\ \dfrac{\mathrm{m}}{\mathrm{s}^2}\cdot\sqrt{1-\left(\dfrac vc\right)^2}##. Solving this differential equation yields the nutters result of a periodic function. So, clearly, something's wrong with this expression. But what, exactly?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Google for "Rindler coordinates" - they were invented for exactly this situation.
 
The trajectory of an object undergoing constant proper acceleration is called hyperbolic motion. Because, I guess, it can be expressed in terms of hyperbolic functions. :wink: An equivalent but simpler result is

x = (1/a)√(1 + a2t2) - 1
v = dx/dt = at/√(1 + a2t2)

EDIT: Should point out that this is with c = 1, and sure enough, v → 1 as t → ∞.
 
Last edited:
Okay, thanks, guys!
 
In an inertial frame of reference (IFR), there are two fixed points, A and B, which share an entangled state $$ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|0>_A|1>_B+|1>_A|0>_B) $$ At point A, a measurement is made. The state then collapses to $$ |a>_A|b>_B, \{a,b\}=\{0,1\} $$ We assume that A has the state ##|a>_A## and B has ##|b>_B## simultaneously, i.e., when their synchronized clocks both read time T However, in other inertial frames, due to the relativity of simultaneity, the moment when B has ##|b>_B##...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • · Replies 75 ·
3
Replies
75
Views
7K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
4K