How can we accurately measure the relative velocity between two moving bodies?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the measurement of relative velocity between two bodies, A and B, moving perpendicular to each other with velocities 'a' and 'b'. Participants explore how to accurately determine their relative velocities, particularly in the context of applying Lorentz transformations and understanding the implications of their motion in different reference frames.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose using Lorentz transformations to find A's velocity with respect to B, emphasizing the need for separate laws for perpendicular and parallel components.
  • Others suggest rotating the system to simplify the analysis of relative motion.
  • Confusion arises regarding the measurement of B's velocity from A's perspective, with some asserting that A would measure B's velocity as zero in A's direction of motion.
  • Participants discuss the resultant velocity of A and B, with varying interpretations of how to calculate the magnitude and direction of this resultant.
  • Some contributions introduce 4-vector methods to analyze the problem from a relativistic perspective, while others question whether the problem can be treated classically.
  • There are references to basic principles of relative velocity, indicating that some participants believe the topic should be straightforward, yet the discussion remains complex.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views on how to approach the problem, with no consensus reached on the best method for measuring relative velocity. Confusion and differing interpretations persist throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the potential for misunderstanding due to the complexity of the problem, suggesting that it may not be strictly a special relativity issue and could be approached classically. There are also references to the need for clarity in defining the axes and components involved in the calculations.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and enthusiasts of physics, particularly those exploring concepts of relative motion, special relativity, and vector analysis in different reference frames.

anantchowdhary
Messages
372
Reaction score
0
Suppose two bodies A and B are moving perpendicular to each other with velocities 'a' and 'b'.

A with 'a'
^
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
---------------------------------------------->B with 'b'


Now how would they measure their relative velocitites?As A's velocity in the direction of motion of B = 0 ,B would feel that A is moving away(linearly) from it with a velocity'b'
And A would feel that B is moving away with velocity 'a'.

Now how do we compare their relative velocity? This is in order to aply the Lorentz transfomation.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
To find A's velocity with respect to B, make a LT with velocity b, using the transformation laws for velocity a (separate law for a perp and a parallel to b).
 
Or rotate the system so that A and B are moving away from each other along an axis.
 
But the velocities of A and B have components that have the value of 0 in their respective axes.

Like if A measures velocity of B in his direction of motion,it comes out to be zero :(
Im confused
 
anantchowdhary said:
Like if A measures velocity of B in his direction of motion,it comes out to be zero :(
No it doesn't. Remember that A is moving upwards in your diagram.
 
Yea i get that,but in his DIRECTION of motion wouldn't he be measuring the velocity of B as zero?
 
Okay, try it this way. How fast is B moving away from A from A's rest frame?
 
with velocity 'a'? and with veolcity 'b' in the direction of the perpendicular axis
 
anantchowdhary said:
with velocity 'a'? and with veolcity 'b' in the direction of the perpendicular axis
Yes, so what is the magnitude of this velocity?
 
  • #10
umm..
a + bcos(theta)
 
  • #11
Perhaps, the hypotenuse of your triangle...
 
  • #12
ok ok sry its the resultant of the two vectors sry :p.How foolish of me
 
  • #13
anantchowdhary said:
ok ok sry its the resultant of the two vectors sry :p.How foolish of me
No problem, and the direction of the resultant vector is...?
 
  • #14
the positive direction of the x axis.BBut one more question..wudnt we do resultantcos(theta) to get the magnitude of the vector in the reference frame's exact direction?
 
  • #15
anantchowdhary said:
the positive direction of the x axis.
No it isn't.
 
  • #16
y isn't it ?

r(x)=a(x) +b(x)
r(y)=a(y) +b(y)

r=r(x)i + r(y)j

r(x)=b
r(y)=a

so y isn't it?the answer is positive
 
  • #17
Think about it for a minute. What is the direction of the resultant velocity (think about the 'poeple swimming across a river' questions that I'm sure you've done.)
 
  • #18
umm i haven't done the above stated question.Im n grade 10.


but wats wrong with the resultant as i said in my previous post?
 
  • #19
I asked for the direction of the resultant velocity and you haven't given it, you've just given two components, which is what we were given at the start of the problem.
 
Last edited:
  • #20
r(x) is positive and so is r(y)

so
r=b i+a j

So what's the problem if theyre in the positive direction of the x and y axes?
 
  • #21
IMHO, in spite of the subject matter, this thread seems more like a homework-type question.
 
  • #22
Hehe,but i can't get y I am wrong:S
 
  • #24
err..thnx
but still please tell me if both r(x) and r(y) are positive wats wrong?

sry but i still can't get it
 
  • #25
When I say resultant vector, what does that mean to you?
 
  • #26
To find A's velocity with respect to B, make a LT with velocity b, using the transformation laws for velocity a (separate law for a perp and a parallel to b).
 
  • #27
masudr said:
Or rotate the system so that A and B are moving away from each other along an axis.

Why not go back and consider what masudr suggested. The axes can be drawn any way you want, so if an axis is drawn directly between the two, and a shift is made to a reference frame in which that axis is not moving, then it is clear that A and B are moving away from each other. Go from there.
 
  • #28
anantchowdhary said:
r(x) is positive and so is r(y)

so
r=b i+a j

So what's the problem if theyre in the positive direction of the x and y axes?

Is there anything wrong here(above)?
[tex]r_x = a_x + b_x[/tex]

[tex]r_y = a_y + b_y[/tex]

But
[tex]r_x = 0 + b_x[/tex]

[tex]r_y = a_y + 0[/tex]

So [tex]r_x[/tex] and [tex]r_y[/tex] are positive.So wouldn't the resutlant also be in the poitive direction of the ' x' axis and in the positive direction of the 'y' axis?

And to find out the angle it makes with the 'x' axis we can find out then [tex]cos\theta^{-1}[/tex]
 
Last edited:
  • #29
It might help to start with the expression for the distance D between the two bodies in terms of x and y coordinates (y for A and x for B), and then take the derivative dD/dt to get the relative velocity. The velocities 'a' and 'b' can then be inserted for dy/dt and dx/dt. The result shows that the relative velocity is the sum of the projections of the two velocities on the line between the two bodies: dD/dt = a cosQ + b sinQ, where Q is the angle at A between the origin and B. This corresponds to intuition.
 
  • #30
In the spirit of chapter 15, Example: Minkowski Vector Spaces, from Mathematical Physics by Robert Geroch, I'm going to have a go at this problem using 4-vector methods.

Let me make sure I understand the problem.

There is an inertial observer C, such that in C's frame: A moves with constant (spatial) velocity [itex]\vec{a}[/itex]; B moves with constant velocity [itex]\vec{b}[/itex]; [itex]\vec{a} \cdot \vec{b} = 0.[/itex]

Now, let the 4-velocities of A, B, and C be [itex]u_a[/itex], [itex]u_b[/itex], and [itex]u_c[/itex], respectively. The 4-velocity of any inertial observer is the unit timelike vector used by that observer to splt spacetime into space and time. Let C do this. Then,

[tex]u_a = \gamma_a \left(u_c + \vec{a} \right)[/tex]
[tex]u_b = \gamma_b \left(u_c + \vec{b} \right),[/tex]

where, in each expression, the first term lies in C's time and the second term lies in C's space.

But A can also split spacetime into space and time. Then,

[tex]u_b = \gamma \left(u_a + b' \right),[/tex]

and thus

[tex]g \left(u_b , u_a \right) = \gamma.[/itex]<br /> <br /> Here, the relative speed [itex]v[/itex] between A and B is used in [itex]\gamma.[/itex]<br /> <br /> But from C's spacetime split,<br /> <br /> [tex]g \left(u_b , u_a \right) = g \left( \gamma_b \left(u_c + \vec{b} \right) , \gamma_a \left(u_c + \vec{a} \right) \right) = \gamma_a \gamma_b.[/itex]<br /> <br /> Consequently,<br /> <br /> [tex]\gamma = \gamma_a \gamma_b,[/tex]<br /> <br /> which can be used to find easily the relation between [itex]v,[/itex] [itex]a,[/itex] and [itex]b.[/itex][/tex][/tex]
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K