Differential form of the velocity equation in a non-standard configuration

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the differentiation of the velocity composition equation in special relativity, particularly in non-standard configurations. Participants explore the mathematical derivation of the differential form of the velocity equation, addressing various aspects of vector calculus and notation.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the original equation for the composition of velocities and attempts to differentiate it, expressing confusion over reaching the final result.
  • Another participant seeks clarification on a specific notation regarding the velocity of a particle, confirming the absence of a prime in the notation.
  • There is a discussion about the ambiguity of a vector product notation in the original post, with participants questioning its interpretation and suggesting possible forms.
  • One participant suggests that the formula in the textbook may contain an error, indicating that the original approach might lead to the correct result.
  • A suggestion is made to analyze the equation component-wise, starting with one component at a time to simplify the differentiation process.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation of vector products and the correctness of the textbook formula. There is no consensus on the final form of the differentiated equation or the validity of the original equation as presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential ambiguities in vector notation and the complexity of differentiating the equation, indicating that assumptions about vector relationships may not be fully resolved.

Shirish
Messages
242
Reaction score
32
I'm reading a text on special relativity (Core Principles of Special and General Relativity), in which we start with the equation for composition of velocities in non-standard configuration. Frame ##S'## velocity w.r.t. ##S## is ##\vec v##, and the velocity of some particle in ##S'## is ##\vec u##. Then the particle's velocity in ##S'## is:

$$\vec u'=\frac{\vec u-\vec v}{1-\vec u.\vec v\ /\ c^2}+\frac{\gamma}{c^2(1+\gamma)}\frac{\vec v\times(\vec v\times\vec u)}{(1-\vec u.\vec v\ /\ c^2)}$$

where ##\gamma=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}}## and ##\vec v## and ##c## are constants. Then the text states that "differentiating" the above equation gives us
$$d\vec u'=\frac{1}{\gamma(1-\vec u.\vec v\ /\ c^2)^2}\bigg[d\vec u-\frac{\gamma}{c^2(1+\gamma)}(\vec v.d\vec u)\ \vec v+\frac{1}{c^2}\vec v\times\vec u\times d\vec u\bigg]$$

I'm struggling with proving this. Just to reduce some of the notational headache, if we denote ##f(\vec u)=\frac{1}{1-\vec u.\vec v\ /\ c^2}##, then
$$df(\vec u)=\frac{f(\vec u)^2\vec v.d\vec u}{c^2}$$

Also let ##K\equiv \frac{\gamma}{c^2(1+\gamma)}##. Then the original equation is:
$$\vec u'=f(\vec u)(\vec u-\vec v)+Kf(\vec u)\ (\vec v\times (\vec v\times\vec u))$$

Differentiating (writing ##f## without its argument for convenience),
$$d\vec u'=(\vec u-\vec v)\ df+fd\vec u + K\ df\ (\vec v\times (\vec v\times\vec u)) + Kf\vec v\ (\vec v.d\vec u)-Kfv^2d\vec u$$
$$=\frac{f^2(\vec u-\vec v)\vec v.d\vec u}{c^2}+fd\vec u + K\ \frac{f^2\vec v.d\vec u}{c^2}\ (\vec v\times (\vec v\times\vec u)) + Kf\vec v\ (\vec v.d\vec u)-Kfv^2d\vec u$$
$$=f^2\bigg[\frac{(\vec u-\vec v)\vec v.d\vec u}{c^2}+\frac{d\vec u}{f} + K\ \frac{\vec v.d\vec u}{c^2}\ (\vec v\times (\vec v\times\vec u)) + \frac{K}{f}\vec v\ (\vec v.d\vec u)-\frac{K}{f}v^2d\vec u\bigg]$$

Beyond this, I'm really not able to get to the final result despite trying a bunch of times. Not sure if I'm overcomplicating things or missing some magical identity that simplifies everything. Would appreciate any help. Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Shirish said:
I'm reading a text on special relativity (Core Principles of Special and General Relativity), in which we start with the equation for composition of velocities in non-standard configuration. Frame S′ velocity w.r.t. S is v→, and the velocity of some particle in S′ is u→. Then the particle's velocity in S′ is:
I read your "and the velocity of some particle in S′ is u→. " as "and the velocity of some particle in S(NO DASH) is u→. ". Just a confirmation.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Shirish
anuttarasammyak said:
I read your "and the velocity of some particle in S′ is u→. " as "and the velocity of some particle in S(NO DASH) is u→. ". Just a confirmation.
Yes that's correct, there shouldn't be a prime. I'll edit the question.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: anuttarasammyak
Shirish said:
I'm reading a text on special relativity (Core Principles of Special and General Relativity), in which we start with the equation for composition of velocities in non-standard configuration. Frame ##S'## velocity w.r.t. ##S## is ##\vec v##, and the velocity of some particle in ##S'## is ##\vec u##. Then the particle's velocity in ##S'## is:

$$\vec u'=\frac{\vec u-\vec v}{1-\vec u.\vec v\ /\ c^2}+\frac{\gamma}{c^2(1+\gamma)}\frac{\vec v\times(\vec v\times\vec u)}{(1-\vec u.\vec v\ /\ c^2)}$$

where ##\gamma=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}}## and ##\vec v## and ##c## are constants. Then the text states that "differentiating" the above equation gives us
$$d\vec u'=\frac{1}{\gamma(1-\vec u.\vec v\ /\ c^2)^2}\bigg[d\vec u-\frac{\gamma}{c^2(1+\gamma)}(\vec v.d\vec u)\ \vec v+\frac{1}{c^2}\vec v\times\vec u\times d\vec u\bigg]$$

I'm struggling with proving this. Just to reduce some of the notational headache, if we denote ##f(\vec u)=\frac{1}{1-\vec u.\vec v\ /\ c^2}##, then
$$df(\vec u)=\frac{f(\vec u)^2\vec v.d\vec u}{c^2}$$

Also let ##K\equiv \frac{\gamma}{c^2(1+\gamma)}##. Then the original equation is:
$$\vec u'=f(\vec u)(\vec u-\vec v)+Kf(\vec u)\ (\vec v\times (\vec v\times\vec u))$$

Differentiating (writing ##f## without its argument for convenience),
$$d\vec u'=(\vec u-\vec v)\ df+fd\vec u + K\ df\ (\vec v\times (\vec v\times\vec u)) + Kf\vec v\ (\vec v.d\vec u)-Kfv^2d\vec u$$
$$=\frac{f^2(\vec u-\vec v)\vec v.d\vec u}{c^2}+fd\vec u + K\ \frac{f^2\vec v.d\vec u}{c^2}\ (\vec v\times (\vec v\times\vec u)) + Kf\vec v\ (\vec v.d\vec u)-Kfv^2d\vec u$$
$$=f^2\bigg[\frac{(\vec u-\vec v)\vec v.d\vec u}{c^2}+\frac{d\vec u}{f} + K\ \frac{\vec v.d\vec u}{c^2}\ (\vec v\times (\vec v\times\vec u)) + \frac{K}{f}\vec v\ (\vec v.d\vec u)-\frac{K}{f}v^2d\vec u\bigg]$$

Beyond this, I'm really not able to get to the final result despite trying a bunch of times. Not sure if I'm overcomplicating things or missing some magical identity that simplifies everything. Would appreciate any help. Thanks!

As that's a vector equation, you could try doing it for one component at a time. Start with ##du_x##. The other two should be the same.
 
I am an old student of vector mathematics. Vector product
\mathbf{v}\times\mathbf{u}\times\mathbf{du}
in the second formula of OP seems ambiguous. Is it
(\mathbf{v}\times\mathbf{u})\times\mathbf{du},
\mathbf{v}\times(\mathbf{u}\times\mathbf{du})
or other?
 
anuttarasammyak said:
I am an old student of vector mathematics. Vector product
\mathbf{v}\times\mathbf{u}\times\mathbf{du}
in the second formula of OP seems ambiguous. Is it
(\mathbf{v}\times\mathbf{u})\times\mathbf{du},
\mathbf{v}\times(\mathbf{u}\times\mathbf{du})
or other?
That's how it's written in the book, unfortunately. I'm thinking it should be ##(\mathbf{v}\times\mathbf{u})\times d\mathbf{u}##, since ##\mathbf{v}\times(\mathbf{u}\times d\mathbf{u})## is zero as ##\mathbf{u}## and ##d\mathbf{u}## are parallel.
 
We can accelerate a moving body in any direction, so not always zero. It seems that formula in the textbook has something wrong. In the way of OP you may have a chance to get the right result.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
1K