Free electron border between relativity and non-relativity

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of a "free" electron and the distinction between relativistic and non-relativistic kinetic energy. Participants explore definitions and implications of kinetic energy in different regimes, referencing equations related to energy and momentum.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants attempt to define what it means for an electron to be "free" and question the necessity of computing the ratio T/mc^2 to determine the kinetic energy regime. They explore the implications of this ratio and its relationship to relativistic effects.

Discussion Status

Some participants provide clarifications regarding the definitions and relationships between kinetic energy and relativistic factors. There is an ongoing exploration of the significance of the ratio T/mc^2 and its implications for understanding relativistic versus non-relativistic cases.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the definitions and mathematical relationships without a consensus on the exact boundaries between relativistic and non-relativistic cases. The discussion includes references to specific equations and the behavior of the Lorentz factor, gamma.

Odyssey
Messages
84
Reaction score
0
"Free" electron...border between relativity and non-relativity

Hello guys...I have a couple of issues that I'm not exactly sure about...

Homework Statement



a) What does it mean to say that an electron is "free"?
b) To figure out the kinetic energy of a particle...one must first have to check if it's a non-relativistic case, or an ultra-relativistic case...my notes have it one should compute the value of [tex]T/mc^2[/tex] (T=kinetic energy)...but why do we have to do that?

Homework Equations


[tex]T/mc^2[/tex]
[tex]T=p^2/2m[/tex]
[tex]E=pc[/tex]
[tex]E=T=pc[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution



a) I think "free" means the electron is moving under no potential? So...in that case...the total energy equals the kinetic energy?

b) I don't know why we have to compute the value of [tex]T/mc^2[/tex]...but I know if it's <<1 then it's a non-relativistic case, and we can use the formula [tex]T=p^2/2m[/tex] to find the Kinetic energy. If [tex]T/mc^2[/tex] is >>1 then it's a relativistic case, and we use [tex]E=T=pc[/tex] to solve for the kinetic energy? What is the definition of the border between non-relativistic and relatiticistic cases? :confused:
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
a) correct, although Total energy may include its mass?
b) Well, Energy of a particle is given by [tex]m_0c^2\gamma[/tex] whilst its energy at rest is given by the same expression without the Lorentz factor. So the kinetic energy is the difference of these two. So Replace T with [tex]m_0c^2(\gamma -1)[/tex] and see what happens :) Hope it helps, you'll find it makes sense because small v makes gamma equal 1, which is correct.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the help. :)
Yes...I plugged in some numbers for v...makes sense! I got one more question...what does the quantity [tex]T/mc^2[/tex] represent? It has no dimensions...I replace T with [tex]m_0c^2(\gamma -1)[/tex]...so it becomes [tex]m_0c^2(\gamma -1)/m_0c^2[/tex]...what does it means do have [tex]\gamma -1 >> 1[/tex]? Why does it represent a relativistic case? [tex]\gamma[/tex] can only take on values between 0 and 1...but with [tex]\gamma -1 >> 1[/tex]...we can actually have [tex]\gamma[/tex]be >1? I think I'm getting a bit mixed up with gamma. =\
 
It represents the ratio of the kinetic energy to rest energy.

[tex]\gamma=\frac{1}{sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}[/tex]. Say we subbed v=0 into gamma, gamma = 1. That means our T/mc^2 ratio is equal to zero, which makes sense, because the ratio of zero kinetic energy to rest energy should be zero.

What it means for gamma - 1 to approach one is quite simple. Its the same as for gamma to approach 2. Let's set gamma=2 and solve for v. Some simple algebra will show you that v/c = (the square root of 3)/2, which is a good portion of the speed of light. That is why it represents a relatavistic case :)

Your a little confused with the gamma. Yours thinking about [tex]sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}[/tex], which can not exceed 1. But gamma is the recipricol of that, and that can exceed 1, because gamma =[tex]\frac{1}{sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}[/tex]. Sub in any case where v>0 you will see that whilst the bottom can not exceed 1, the entire gamma can.

This is exactly what you want to see, since gamma is there to sort of make up for the extra energy.

EG- Rest energy is mc^2, whilst Rest+Kinetic is the same, multiplied by gamma. Since we want REST+KINETC to be more than REST alone, gamma should be more than one.

Sorry if i haven't explained it very well.
 
Thanks! =) gamma is the recipricol...now I understand!
 
Good Work :)
 

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
23
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K