Energy conservation in particle decay

AI Thread Summary
When a massive particle decays into a less massive particle and emits energy, such as a gamma ray, the energy of nearby particles is affected due to gravitational binding. If the decaying particle is gravitationally bound to another, the emitted photons must overcome the gravitational potential, resulting in a redshift and a loss of energy. This process illustrates that energy conservation remains intact, as the total energy of the system, including gravitational effects, is conserved. The gravitational interaction ensures that the energy lost by the emitted photons corresponds to the energy dynamics of the surrounding particles. Thus, the decay process does not violate the conservation of mass-energy, even though the individual energies of particles may change.
nolanp2
Messages
52
Reaction score
0
two massive particles a finite distance from each other are bound to each other gravitationally, so if one disappeared the other one would have its energy altered, and the conservation of mass-energy would be broken.

so what happens when a massive particle decays to a less massive particle with the emission of say a gamma ray? how would the energy of another particle in the vicinity be altered?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
nolanp2 said:
two massive particles a finite distance from each other are bound to each other gravitationally, so if one disappeared the other one would have its energy altered, and the conservation of mass-energy would be broken.

so what happens when a massive particle decays to a less massive particle with the emission of say a gamma ray? how would the energy of another particle in the vicinity be altered?

Consider two heavenly bodies, say the Earth and the moon. Now, consider that the moon breaks up into two pieces in an explosion. What do you think would happen gravitationally ?
 
eh the center of mass would still be at the same point so not much i would guess? but there's still the same amount of mass, it's just been seperated. I'm tsalking about when the net mass of the system is reduced after the event, i don't see how the two relate.
 
nolanp2 said:
eh the center of mass would still be at the same point so not much i would guess? but there's still the same amount of mass, it's just been seperated. I'm tsalking about when the net mass of the system is reduced after the event, i don't see how the two relate.

Well, the center of mass, even in the decay of a particle, will still remain the same, and the total energy also. That is to say, if you add the 4-vectors (E,px,py,pz) of the decay products, you will obtain the original (E,px,py,pz) of the original particle before decay. Now, what counts gravitationally is the E (in fact, the energy-momentum tensor, but we can do with the E here).

So imagine that you have a pi-0, gravitationally bound to, say, a proton (quite hypothetic, I know). If the pi-0 decays into two photons (each initially of energy about the mass of the pi-0 divided by 2), then those two photons will have to "climb out of the gravitational potential well" of the proton, and loose energy (shift to red). In the end, the two photons will have a total energy which is less than the energy of the pi-0, with exactly the amount of gravitational energy they needed to overcome the gravitational potential energy.

Of course, in practice this is ridiculous, because the gravitational energy of a proton and a pion are so terribly tiny as compared to the mass-energy of a pion, that you will never be able to measure this.
 
nolanp2 said:
two massive particles a finite distance from each other are bound to each other gravitationally, so if one disappeared the other one would have its energy altered, and the conservation of mass-energy would be broken.

so what happens when a massive particle decays to a less massive particle with the emission of say a gamma ray? how would the energy of another particle in the vicinity be altered?
If photons could travel against the gravitational field without loosing energy, then energy conservation would be violated. We can use this to calculate the effect of gravity on the energy (frequency) of photons.
Imagine this experiment:

A particle with mass m decays into two photons, which travel upwards for a hight z in gravitational field g. Then they assemble back to original particle, which travels back to the original location. If gravity did not affect photons, then this (cyclical) proces would be a perpetuum mobile, since we would get out work done by gravitational force on every cycle.
For energy to be conserved, a photon traveling in gravitational field must loose exactly as much energy as a massive particle with m=E/c^2=h*f/c^2 (f=photon frequency).

This must also be true for infinitezimal hight dz:

m*g*dz=h*df
E*g*dz/c^2=h*df
f*g*dz/c^2=h*df

Consequence:

df/dz=f*g/c^2
 
ok so the photons are still affected by the gravitational potential of the other particle after decay, but what happens to the other particle after this? is the energy lost by the photons making up for the energy gained by the other particle by losing its original graitational well?
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top