How Do You Derive 4-Acceleration from 4-Velocity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JabberWalkie
  • Start date Start date
JabberWalkie
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
4-velocity --> 4-acceleration?

Hey all, my first post here.

Now, I am trying to derive the 4-acceleration from the 4-velocity by explicitly calculating du/d(tau). So from Hartle we have

u=( gamma, gamma*v)

where gamma=1/Sqrt(1-v^2)

and v is the 3 velocity, taking c=1

So then,

du/d(tau)=( d(gamma)/d(tau), d(gamma*v)/d(tau) )

from the book we have

du/d(tau)=(gamma*(a dot v), gamma*a)

so then we should have

d(gamma)/d(tau)=gamma*(a dot v)

but when i calculate d(gamma)/d(tau) i get...ok I am going to show all my steps so people can know what I've done...

d(gamma)/d(tau)=[d(gamma)/dv)]*[dv/dt]*[dt/d(tau)]

=[d(1/(1-v^2)^(1/2))/dv]*[a][gamma]

=[(-1/2)(-2*(v)/(1-v^2)^(3/2)]*[a]*[gamma]

=[ va/(1-v^2)^(3/2)*[1/gamma]

=v*a*gamma^4 != v*a*gamma

does anyone know what's going wrong or what I am doing wrong??

Any help would be appreciated, Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You should expect that "proper acceleration", which can be defined as the magnitude of your 4-acceleration, is related to coordinate acceleration by a factor of gamma^3, not by a factor of gamma.

See for instance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbolic_motion_(relativity )

(which has this result, but doesn't work through the math, unfortunately).

But if we work through your example, we get for the two components of the 4-acceleration

v*a*gamma^4, a*gamma^4

Note that this makes the 4-acceleration vector Minknowski-perpendicular to the 4-velocity, this is another known result.

Now when we take the squared magnitude of the above we get

(1-v^2)*a^2*gamma^8 = a^2*gamma^6

so the square root of this is a * gamma^3, i.e. the magnitude of the 4-acceleration is gamma^3 times the magnitude of the coordinate acceleration, which is what we expect.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
Thread 'Dirac's integral for the energy-momentum of the gravitational field'
See Dirac's brief treatment of the energy-momentum pseudo-tensor in the attached picture. Dirac is presumably integrating eq. (31.2) over the 4D "hypercylinder" defined by ##T_1 \le x^0 \le T_2## and ##\mathbf{|x|} \le R##, where ##R## is sufficiently large to include all the matter-energy fields in the system. Then \begin{align} 0 &= \int_V \left[ ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g}\, \right]_{,\nu} d^4 x = \int_{\partial V} ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g} \, dS_\nu \nonumber\\ &= \left(...
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...

Similar threads

Back
Top