Does Conservation of Momentum & Energy Hold in the C.O.M. Reference Frame?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the applicability of conservation of momentum and energy in the center of mass reference frame, particularly at speeds approaching the speed of light. Participants explore the implications of classical and relativistic physics on these conservation laws.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that classical equations do not uphold conservation of momentum and energy at relativistic speeds, questioning their validity in the center of mass reference frame.
  • Others argue that conservation laws remain valid in relativity, but the classical expressions for energy and momentum are inadequate at high speeds.
  • A participant suggests that classical conservation laws may not apply in the center of mass frame when considering relativistic particles, indicating a need for special relativity for accurate predictions.
  • Another participant clarifies that the term "center of mass frame" may be ambiguous and emphasizes the importance of using "center-of-momentum frame" in the context of relativity, where total three-momentum is zero.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the applicability of classical conservation laws in the center of mass frame at relativistic speeds, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain without a clear consensus.

Contextual Notes

There is ambiguity regarding the definitions of classical physics and the center of mass versus center-of-momentum frames, which may affect the interpretation of the discussion.

ruivocanadense
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
Do classical conservation laws apply to center of mass frame at speeds close to the speed of light?
We know classical equations fail to follow conservation of momentum and energy when we are dealing with speeds closer to the speed of light. But does it fail in the center of mass reference frame of a system?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The conservation laws work just fine (energy is neither created nor destroyed - tuis is true in relativity just as it is in Newtonian physics). It's the non-relativistic expressions for the energy and momentum that are not correct, and are not a good approximation at high speeds.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
ruivocanadense said:
We know classical equations fail to follow conservation of momentum and energy when we are dealing with speeds closer to the speed of light. But does it fail in the center of mass reference frame of a system?
Yes, the classical formulas for momentum kinetic energy fail in the center of mass frame as well.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ruivocanadense
ruivocanadense said:
Summary:: Do classical conservation laws apply to center of mass frame at speeds close to the speed of light?

We know classical equations fail to follow conservation of momentum and energy when we are dealing with speeds closer to the speed of light. But does it fail in the center of mass reference frame of a system?

From context, I assume that you don't regard special relativity as a "classical theory". It seems that it's a bit ambiguous, I am used to regarding it as a classical theory (as it's not quantum), but after looking at the definition, I suspect the term may be ambiguous. In any event - if two relativistic particles collide, correct predictions of the energy require special relativity, not Newtonian physics. Which I believe would be a "yes", if we assume that by classical physics you mean only Newtonian physics.
 
In relativity it's more accurate to speak about a center-of-momentum frame rather than a center-of-mass frame. By definition the CM frame is defined such that the total three-momentum of the particles involved in the scattering vanishes.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: SiennaTheGr8

Similar threads

  • · Replies 87 ·
3
Replies
87
Views
6K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
7K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K