Does kinetic energy vary by frame of reference?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the nature of kinetic energy and its dependence on the observer's frame of reference. Participants explore both classical and relativistic perspectives on kinetic energy, examining how it varies with different velocities of observers. The scope includes theoretical considerations and mathematical formulations related to kinetic energy transformations in different inertial frames.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that kinetic energy is observer-dependent, as illustrated by examples involving different observers measuring the kinetic energy of the same object moving at different velocities.
  • One participant presents the relativistic expression for kinetic energy, indicating that it incorporates additional terms that become significant at high velocities, thus differing from the classical expression.
  • Another participant inquires about the relationship between kinetic energy in different inertial frames and suggests using Lorentz transformations to relate energy and momentum across these frames.
  • Some participants express confusion regarding the mathematical symbols and concepts presented, yet acknowledge the general agreement that kinetic energy varies with the observer's frame of reference.
  • There are mentions of using four-momentum to transform kinetic energy between reference frames, emphasizing its role in relativistic physics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that kinetic energy is dependent on the observer's frame of reference. However, there are multiple competing views regarding the specifics of how kinetic energy transforms between frames, and the discussion remains unresolved on certain mathematical aspects.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the mathematical symbols and concepts used in the discussion, indicating a potential gap in understanding the transformations involved in kinetic energy calculations.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and professionals in physics, particularly those exploring concepts in classical mechanics and relativity, as well as those interested in the mathematical frameworks used to describe energy and momentum in different reference frames.

Bigman
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
Kinetic energy is 1/2mv^2, and velocity varies depending on velocity of the observer, so does kinetic energy also vary depending on the velocity of the observer? for example, someone sitting in a bus who slides a 2 kg brick down the center isle of the bus at 5 m/s could say the has a kinetic energy of 25 joules, while someone on the side of the road who observes the brick's velocity as 55m/s (the bus is doing 50m/s) would say the bricks kinetic energy is 3025 joules. would they both be right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, KE is an observer-dependent quantity!

Bigman said:
Kinetic energy is 1/2mv^2, and velocity varies depending on velocity of the observer, so does kinetic energy also vary depending on the velocity of the observer?

The relativistic expression for the kinetic energy of a particle with mass m moving at velocity v wrt some inertial observer (in flat spacetime) is
[tex] {\rm KE} = m \, \left( -1 + \cosh(\operatorname{arctanh}(v)) \right) = m \left( -1 + \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-v^2}} \right) = \frac{1}{2} \, m v^2 + \frac{3}{8} \, m v^4 + O(v^6)[/tex]
where the first term in the last expression is the Newtonian expression for the kinetic energy (of a particle with mass m moving at velocity v wrt some inertial observer). All the "relativistic correction terms" here are positive, so the relativistic expression is always greater than the Newtonian expression, but they agree pretty nearly when v is much smaller than unity. (I am using "geometric units" in which c=1.) It was from examining the expression [itex]m \cosh{\operatorname{arctanh}{v}}[/itex] that Einstein deduced the famous equivalence of mass and energy, incidently!

Now, holding m fixed and varying v it is easy to see that the KE varies in both Newtonian and relativistic physics, so KE is an observer-dependent quantity.
 
Last edited:
kinetic energy transformation

Chris Hillman said:
The relativistic expression for the kinetic energy of a particle with mass m moving at velocity v wrt some inertial observer (in flat spacetime) is
[tex] {\rm KE} = m \, \left( -1 + \cosh(\operatorname{arctanh}(v)) \right) = m \left( -1 + \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-v^2}} \right) = \frac{1}{2} \, m v^2 + \frac{3}{8} \, m v^4 + O(v^6)[/tex]
where the first term in the last expression is the Newtonian expression for the kinetic energy (of a particle with mass m moving at velocity v wrt some inertial observer). All the "relativistic correction terms" here are positive, so the relativistic expression is always greater than the Newtonian expression, but they agree pretty nearly when v is much smaller than unity. (I am using "geometric units" in which c=1.) It was from examining the expression [itex]m \cosh{\operatorname{arctanh}{v}}[/itex] that Einstein deduced the famous equivalence of mass and energy, incidently!

Now, holding m fixed and varying v it is easy to see that the KE varies in both Newtonian and relativistic physics, so KE is an observer-dependent quantity.
Please tell me if the kinetic energy of a particle is K in I and K' in I' then how are they related. Do you know a place where the problem is discussed. Thanks in advance.
 
Bigman said:
Kinetic energy is 1/2mv^2, and velocity varies depending on velocity of the observer, so does kinetic energy also vary depending on the velocity of the observer? for example, someone sitting in a bus who slides a 2 kg brick down the center isle of the bus at 5 m/s could say the has a kinetic energy of 25 joules, while someone on the side of the road who observes the brick's velocity as 55m/s (the bus is doing 50m/s) would say the bricks kinetic energy is 3025 joules. would they both be right?
The short answer is yes. Kinetic energy, like velocity, is different for observers moving at different speeds.
 
bernhard.rothenstein said:
Please tell me if the kinetic energy of a particle is K in I and K' in I' then how are they related.

The total energy [itex]E = K + m_0 c^2[/itex] and momentum [itex]p[/itex] in two different inertial reference frames are related by the Lorentz transformation:

[tex]p^{\prime}c = \gamma (pc - \beta E)[/tex]

[tex]E^{\prime} = \gamma (E - \beta pc)[/tex]

because [itex]E[/itex] and [itex]pc[/itex] form a four-vector just like [itex]ct[/itex] and [itex]x[/itex].

[tex]x^{\prime} = \gamma (x - \beta ct)[/tex]

[tex]ct^{\prime} = \gamma (ct - \beta x)[/tex]
 
kinetic energy transformation

jtbell said:
The total energy [itex]E = K + m_0 c^2[/itex] and momentum [itex]p[/itex] in two different inertial reference frames are related by the Lorentz transformation:

[tex]p^{\prime}c = \gamma (pc - \beta E)[/tex]

[tex]E^{\prime} = \gamma (E - \beta pc)[/tex]

because [itex]E[/itex] and [itex]pc[/itex] form a four-vector just like [itex]ct[/itex] and [itex]x[/itex].

[tex]x^{\prime} = \gamma (x - \beta ct)[/tex]

[tex]ct^{\prime} = \gamma (ct - \beta x)[/tex]
Thanks for your answer. My question is how does transform kinetic energy? It would be correct to approach as
dW(k)=F(x)dx
dW'(k)=F'(x)dx'
and to take into account F(x)=F'(x)
(W(k), W'(k) kinetic energy in I and I', F(x) and F'(x) the OX components of the force acting on the particle.
 
man, i see a lot of symbols i don't recognize (like the upper case beta and the trig functions with the 'h' on the end), but i think i get the jist of it. at the very least, i know that the answer to my question is yes :D thanks for the responses guys
 
Bigman said:
man, i see a lot of symbols i don't recognize (like the upper case beta and the trig functions with the 'h' on the end), but i think i get the jist of it. at the very least, i know that the answer to my question is yes :D thanks for the responses guys

[itex]\beta = v/c[/itex]

The hyperbolic trig functions referred to are described for instance at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hyperbolic_function&oldid=167748987
 
If you want to transform KE between reference frames I would recommend using the four-momentum. Energy is the timelike part of the four-momentum and momentum is the spacelike part. Together they transform like any other four-vector.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 87 ·
3
Replies
87
Views
6K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 144 ·
5
Replies
144
Views
10K