1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Galilean invariance verification (kinetic energy and momentum)

  1. Aug 9, 2011 #1
    Hi all,

    First of all, sorry for not using the template, but I think in this situation it's better to explain my problem right away:
    I'm studying for a physics test, but I think I don't really understand Galilean invariance. In my textbook there is an example in which they proof that if you consider 2 frames S and S' in standard configuration that the second law of Newton is Galilean invariant by proofing that if [itex]x' = x - Vt[/itex] than [itex]F_x = F'_x[/itex], so this law holds in both frames. So far I understand this.

    However, in the book there is one assignment in which they ask me to verify that the relationship between kinetic energy and momentum, [itex]E = p^2/2m[/itex], is Galilean invariant. I couldn't really figure it out by myself so I looked at the answers. The answer is as followed:
    Source: McComb, W. D., 1999. Dynamics and Relativity. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.

    I understand all of the equations, however I just don't understand why this verifies that this relationship is Galilean invariant.

    Can someone explain this to me?

    Thanks!
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 9, 2011 #2

    cepheid

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    There is a problem with the computation of E' in the solutions. It should read:

    [tex] E^\prime = \frac{1}{2}m(\dot{x}^{\prime})^2 =\frac{1}{2}m(\dot{x}-V)^2 = \frac{1}{2}m(\dot{x}^2 - 2\dot{x}V + V^2) [/tex]

    [tex] = \frac{1}{2}m\dot{x}^2 - m\dot{x}V + \frac{1}{2}mV^2 [/tex]

    You can see that this expression for E' is the same as what is obtained if you assume that E' = (p')2/2m, showing that this relation between kinetic energy and momentum does indeed hold in S' as well.
     
  4. Aug 10, 2011 #3
    thank you sp much! I completely missed that. now it'd all clear to me:)
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Galilean invariance verification (kinetic energy and momentum)
  1. Galilean Invariance (Replies: 1)

Loading...