Help me find my error in a relativistic kinetic energy calculation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a calculation of relativistic kinetic energy for an asteroid moving at a velocity close to the speed of light. Participants explore the implications of using the Lorentz factor in energy calculations, particularly in the context of a hypothetical particle accelerator. The conversation includes attempts to identify errors in the calculations presented by the original poster.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • The original poster presents a calculation of kinetic energy for an asteroid moving at 99.99999999999999999999951% of the speed of light, claiming a total kinetic energy of 1.44 E+36 Joules based on a Lorentz factor of 3.2 E+11.
  • Some participants request more details on the calculations to identify potential errors, emphasizing the need to show work for clarity.
  • There is a discussion about the energy required to accelerate the asteroid, with the original poster suggesting it is significantly lower than the total kinetic energy, which raises questions about the validity of the calculations.
  • One participant points out that the Lorentz factor should be used when calculating energy for objects moving at relativistic speeds, challenging the original poster's approach of excluding it for acceleration calculations.
  • Another participant clarifies that the equation KE = mc² represents rest energy, not kinetic energy, and emphasizes that kinetic energy should be calculated based on the change from rest.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the application of the Lorentz factor in the context of acceleration to relativistic speeds. While some agree that the Lorentz factor is necessary, others question the original poster's reasoning for excluding it. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specific calculations and the implications of the energy values presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight potential issues with rounding errors due to the high precision of numbers used in calculations. There is also mention of the need for clarity in the calculations to avoid misunderstandings.

Serenityseeker22
Messages
4
Reaction score
1
Hi everyone.
Given: an asteroid with the mass of 50,000,000 kg, which is moving with the velocity of oh-my-god particle -- 99.99999999999999999999951% of c.
Due to relativistic effects, its total kinetic energy will be 1.44 E+36 Joules (Lorentz factor = 3.2 E+11).
A hypothetical particle accelerator accelerates bodies 40,000,000 times faster than the most powerful real accelerator.
The energy needed to accelerate such asteroid to this speed is several orders of magnitude lower than the total kinetic energy, or around 4.5 E+24 Joules
I know that there's some mistake, but can't see it yet.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
We can't see your mistake either, unless you show us the details of your calculations. :frown:
 
What I'm trying to say is that the energy needed to accelerate the asteroid is much lesser, than the total kinetic energy this asteroid distributes. It violates some laws of physics, I'm sure of it, but I don't know what exactly and how.

My calculations:

Lorentz factor --
9e74c1f95dd3e0bb0fbb32ae1be1ed4a0c29c6a2

oh-my-god particle's speed -- 99.99999999999999999999951% of light speed
light speed -- 299,792,458 m/s
Relativistic kinetic energy --
rke2.gif

mass -- 50,000,000 kg
Lorentz factor calculation

v2 / c2 = (0.9999999999999999999999951 * 299,792,458)2 / 299,792,458 2 = 0,9999999999999999999999902

Thus, Lorentz factor equals -- 1 / √(1-0,9999999999999999999999902 ) = 319 438 282 499,97

Total kinetic energy equals 50,000,000 * 299,792,4582*(319 438 282 499,97-1), or rougly 1.435 E+36 Joules

To accelerate an asteroid to such speed, I used the same formula sans the Lorentz factor. So, energy needed to accelerate this rock by a hypothetical particle accelerator is 4.5 E+24 Joules
Where's my mistake?
 

Attachments

  • rke2.gif
    rke2.gif
    1.5 KB · Views: 984
Serenityseeker22 said:
I used the same formula sans the Lorentz factor.
What same formula? Show your work. And why ever would you remove the Lorentz factor?
 
Serenityseeker22 said:
To accelerate an asteroid to such speed, I used the same formula sans the Lorentz factor. So, energy needed to accelerate this rock by a hypothetical particle accelerator is 4.5 E+24 Joules
Where did that ##4.5\times{10}^{24}## number come from? How did you calculate it? Show your work.

You can simplify the calculations some by setting ##c=1## to get rid of the factors of 299792458. This is equivalent to choosing to measure distances in units of light-seconds instead of meters (the speed of light is one light-second per second) so doesn't change the physics. You can always convert back to Joules when you're done.

Don't use a hand calculator for problems like this one. You have so many decimal places in some of your numbers that roundoff errors will kill your accuracy. Instead, you can use one of the many online arbitrary precision calculators - google for "online infinite precision calculator".
 
Nugatory said:
Where did that ##4.5\times{10}^{24}## number come from? How did you calculate it? Show your work.

You can simplify the calculations some by setting ##c=1## to get rid of the factors of 299792458. This is equivalent to choosing to measure distances in units of light-seconds instead of meters (the speed of light is one light-second per second) so doesn't change the physics. You can always convert back to Joules when you're done.

Don't use a hand calculator for problems like this one. You have so many decimal places in some of your numbers that roundoff errors will kill your accuracy. Instead, you can use one of the many online arbitrary precision calculators - google for "online infinite precision calculator".
Same formula,KE=M*C2 just without Lorentz factor, because I thought it's only relevant when the body moves with relativistic speeds, not when it gets accelerated. Of course I might be wrong, and I probably am, that's why I'm asking.
 
Serenityseeker22 said:
when the body moves with relativistic speeds, not when it gets accelerated.
As you accelerate to relativistic speed the body moves with relativistic speed. You need the Lorentz factor.
 
Dale said:
As you accelerate to relativistic speed the body moves with relativistic speed. You need the Lorentz factor.
That's what I needed to hear, thank you very much.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Dale
Serenityseeker22 said:
KE=M*C2
KE=MC^2 never tells you kinetic energy. It always tells you rest energy.
 
  • #10
Of course, the kinetic energy is equal to the energy it takes to accelerate the mass from rest.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K