Finding the speed of a relativistic particle

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the speed of a relativistic particle based on its energy, specifically using protons at the LHC with an energy of 7 TeV. The user attempts to derive the speed from mass-energy equations, arriving at a speed close to the speed of light, but questions the validity of their approach. Participants note that while the method may work for high energies, it is an approximation and suggest using the Lorentz factor for more accurate calculations. The conversation also touches on the need for precise calculations of kinetic energy required to reach specific speeds, particularly for electrons, and the existence of various approximations for different energy ranges. Overall, the thread highlights the complexities of relativistic physics and the importance of using the correct formulas for accurate results.
alba
Messages
140
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement



This is not homework. I am trying to figure out a simple and quick way to find the speed that correspond to a given energy can you tell me if it is correct?
.
At LHC they had experiments that give protons 7 Tera eV:
we know that a proton is .938272 Gev , so 7*10^12/.938*10^9 = 7460 is the increase of masses.

Now if we reverse the formula for mass

Homework Equations



7460+1 = 1 / √1 -x^2

we get
(1-x^2) 7461^2 = 1
x2 = 74612/ 7461^2+1 x = 0.999999991

The result matches LHC info, is there any mistake?

If this is correct why isn't the reverse accepted any more and the current formula is
E = p 2c 2 + m 2c^4?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
alba said:
This is not homework. I am trying to figure out a simple and quick way to find the speed that correspond to a given energy can you tell me if it is correct?
.
At LHC they had experiments that give protons 7 Tera eV:
we know that a proton is .938272 Gev , so 7*10^12/.938*10^9 = 7460 is the increase of masses.

Now if we reverse the formula for mass

Homework Equations



7460+1 = 1 / √1 -x^2

we get
(1-x^2) 7461^2 = 1
x2 = 74612/ 7461^2+1 x = 0.999999991

The result matches LHC info, is there any mistake?

looking at your estimates it appears that for large energies it may work.but its an approximation and yourx is nearly 1.
have you calculated for say energies 0,5 c etc,
if you are posing an alternative form pl. give in a formula form.relating energy and velocity
 
  • Like
Likes alba
drvrm said:
looking at your estimates it appears that for large energies it may work.but its an approximation and yourx is nearly 1.
have you calculated for say energies 0,5 c etc,
if you are posing an alternative form pl. give in a formula form.relating energy and velocity
I applied the γ Lorenz formula. why doesn't it work at all energies?

Can you show me ho to find the KE (the energy we must supply) to en electron to reach 0.8c?
Or conversely the speed it reaches if we suply .511MeV of energy.
I read that thespeed is rougly 0.82 C can you tell me how to reach an accuracy of 5 digits, Please?

Thanks a lot
 
alba said:
I applied the γ Lorenz formula. why doesn't it work at all energies?

Can you show me ho to find the KE (the energy we must supply) to en electron to reach 0.8c?
Or conversely the speed it reaches if we suply .511MeV of energy.
I read that thespeed is rougly 0.82 C can you tell me how to reach an accuracy of 5 digits, Please?

there are various approx. relations for different energy range
a comparative discussion has been done in the following ;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy–momentum_relation or on other sites
actually for a good range classical forms also works approx.
but the form used by general people is thesquare of energy related to p^2c^2 and square of rest mass energy ;as it is applicable to photons as well -particles with zero rest mass.
regarding accuracy of calculation -it depends on the no. of significant figures one needs in the range of values.
i wonder what is the problem in calculating electrons speed /energy?
 
  • Like
Likes alba
drvrm said:
there are various
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy–momentum_relation or on other sites
?
That link is no help, why are there various approx ? Isn't the formula valid for all speeds?
the canonical formula says at .866 C there are 2 masses (1/√1-.75 (=.25)), minus one it means that it takes one electron mass .511 MeV of Ke to reach .866 C.
The point is that the Bertozzi experiment found the actual speed = .82
I'd like to learn to calculate with a certain accuracy energies required from .6 to .9 C.
If you can't be bothered to show me how it is done, please give me some useful links.
Thanks a lot, your help s highly appreciated
 
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanged mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top