How Does Relativistic Two-Way Momentum Appear to Different Observers?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter John232
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Momentum Relativistic
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of relativistic momentum as perceived by different observers, particularly focusing on how momentum is measured from various frames of reference. Participants explore the implications of frame-dependent quantities in both Newtonian and relativistic contexts, raising questions about the nature of momentum and its relationship to acceleration and reference frames.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that an observer not on Earth would measure different velocities for an object due to Earth's rotation, leading to different momentum calculations.
  • It is noted that momentum is a frame-variant quantity, meaning different observers can disagree on its value.
  • One participant questions whether it is impossible to show that an object has the same momentum from another frame of reference, suggesting this could imply a fictitious force.
  • Another participant emphasizes that even in Newtonian physics, momentum depends on the observer, reinforcing the idea that momentum is observer-dependent.
  • There is a discussion about whether momentum could be described in terms of an aether, with some participants expressing skepticism about this idea.
  • One participant argues that there seems to be only one frame of reference that provides correct momentum values, raising concerns about the implications for relativity.
  • Another participant counters that every frame's value of momentum is correct within that frame, and disagreement between frames does not imply one is right and the other wrong.
  • Technical discussions arise regarding the covariant nature of 4-momentum in special relativity, with some participants debating the terminology used.
  • Some participants express a desire for more technical detail on how relativity applies to momentum, while others suggest starting with classical Newtonian mechanics as a foundation.
  • There is a reiteration of the principle of relativity, stating that all inertial reference frames are equally valid, which leads to questions about how one determines the correct frame to use.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that momentum is frame-dependent, but there is disagreement on the implications of this fact and whether it challenges the concept of relativity. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the nature of momentum and the validity of different frames of reference.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the relationship between momentum and acceleration, as well as the implications of using different frames of reference. There are also unresolved questions about the role of an absolute frame of reference in governing momentum.

  • #31
John232 said:
You could only measure momentum by its true relative velocity to the object it is traveling relative to in the collision.
No, you can measure momentum relative to any frame you like. That is the whole point of the principle of relativity (whether Galilean relativity in Newtonian mechanics or special relativity in Einstein's mechanics).

In each frame the momentum will be different, but in each frame using the momentum for that frame will give you the correct answers in that frame for the collision.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
DaleSpam said:
No, you can measure momentum relative to any frame you like. That is the whole point of the principle of relativity (whether Galilean relativity in Newtonian mechanics or special relativity in Einstein's mechanics).

In each frame the momentum will be different, but in each frame using the momentum for that frame will give you the correct answers in that frame for the collision.

Really? So there is a parallel universe that pops up that shows different results for a collision? I still don't see how you could use a different frame to calculate momentum correctly, the whole reason for this discussion. Could you show an example where the collision is the same in two separate frames of references?
 
  • #33
John232 said:
Really? So there is a parallel universe that pops up that shows different results for a collision?
Nonsense.

John232 said:
I still don't see how you could use a different frame to calculate momentum correctly, the whole reason for this discussion. Could you show an example where the collision is the same in two separate frames of references?
Sure, work any collision problem you like in any frame you like and post the results, and I will transform it to another frame and post the results.
 
  • #34
DaleSpam said:
Sure, work any collision problem you like in any frame you like and post the results, and I will transform it to another frame and post the results.

Newton hits a bowling ball that weights 1kg with another bowling ball that weights 1kg. One is at rest on a table, and the other is moveing at 1 m/s. The ball at rest then gets hit and then moves 1m/s in the opposite direction.
 
  • #35
John232 said:
Newton hits a bowling ball that weights 1kg with another bowling ball that weights 1kg. One is at rest on a table, and the other is moveing at 1 m/s. The ball at rest then gets hit and then moves 1m/s in the opposite direction.
I think you mean the same direction; in frame S1 initially ball A is moving to the right at 1m/s, and it collides elastically with the stationary ball B, so then ball A comes to a stop and ball B moves to the right at 1m/s. Now consider frame S2, which is moving at 3m/s to the left with respect to frame S1. In frame S2 initially ball A is moving at 4m/s to the right and ball B is moving at 3m/s to the right, and they collide elastically, so then ball A is moving at 3m/s to the right and ball B is moving at 4m/s to the right.
 
  • #36
lugita15 said:
I think you mean the same direction; in frame S1 initially ball A is moving to the right at 1m/s, and it collides elastically with the stationary ball B, so then ball A comes to a stop and ball B moves to the right at 1m/s. Now consider frame S2, which is moving at 3m/s to the left with respect to frame S1. In frame S2 initially ball A is moving at 4m/s to the right and ball B is moving at 3m/s to the right, and they collide elastically, so then ball A is moving at 3m/s to the right and ball B is moving at 4m/s to the right.

I meant the opposite side of the ball. So then how did you find that an object traveling at 4m/s would only transfer 1 Newton to the other object that is traveling at 3m/s?
 
  • #37
John232 said:
Newton hits a bowling ball that weights 1kg with another bowling ball that weights 1kg. One is at rest on a table, and the other is moveing at 1 m/s. The ball at rest then gets hit and then moves 1m/s in the opposite direction.
Since you didn't work the problem out you made a mistake. The other ball will move in the same direction as the original ball. But anyway, consider the frame where the other ball is at initially at rest.

One ball is moving at -1 m/s and is on a table which is also moving at -1 m/s, the other ball is at rest. The ball at rest gets hit and then moves at -1 m/s.

EDIT: lugita15's analysis also works (and is more interesting), the point is that you can use any frame you feel like using.
 
Last edited:
  • #38
John232 said:
I meant the opposite side of the ball. So then how did you find that an object traveling at 4m/s would only transfer 1 Newton to the other object that is traveling at 3m/s?
They're transferring momentum, measured in kg m/s, not force, measured in kg m/s^2 or Newtons (although they presumably will exert forces on each other while they are colliding). The momentum transferred between the two balls is (1 kg)(4m/s)-(1 kg)(3m/s) = 1 kg m/s.
 
  • #39
lugita15 said:
They're transferring momentum, measured in kg m/s, not force, measured in kg m/s^2 or Newtons (although they presumably will exert forces on each other while they are colliding). The momentum transferred between the two balls is (1 kg)(4m/s)-(1 kg)(3m/s) = 1 kg m/s.

Sounds a lot like what I was saying before. You have to find the difference in the two objects themselves to find the true transfer of momentum. That is what you just did by doing that calculation.
 
  • #40
John232 said:
Sounds a lot like what I was saying before. You have to find the difference in the two objects themselves to find the true transfer of momentum. That is what you just did by doing that calculation.
Didn't I just cover this in post #28?
 
  • #41
lugita15 said:
Didn't I just cover this in post #28?

I thought I did in my quote on post #28. I didn't see anything in the posted link that would show it would be used in a tranfer of momentum. It simply doesn't have some key variables in it to determine that. I think if it was used to determine a transfer of momentum by adding the velocities in this way it wouldn't give the correct value that an observer would get being at rest relative to one of the two objects. The addition of velocity formula in SR wouldn't be used to determine the transfer of momentum because the added distance between two objects is arbritray to the calculation. The two objects would be hitting each other not moveing away from each other closer to the speed of light.
 
  • #42
John232 said:
I think if it was used to determine a transfer of momentum by adding the velocities in this way it wouldn't give the correct value that an observer would get being at rest relative to one of the two objects. The addition of velocity formula in SR wouldn't be used to determine the transfer of momentum because the added distance between two objects is arbritray to the calculation. The two objects would be hitting each other not moveing away from each other closer to the speed of light.
In SR it is actually more convenient to work with momentum than with velocity. Momentum adds like normal in SR, and it is only the relationship between momentum and velocity which is non-linear. The conservation of the 4-momentum encapsulates the conservation of energy, conservation of mass, and conservation of momentum into one nice convenient mathematical package.
 
  • #43
John232 said:
I meant the opposite side of the ball. So then how did you find that an object traveling at 4m/s would only transfer 1 Newton to the other object that is traveling at 3m/s?
The same way you found it in the original. Conservation of KE for an elastic collision.
 
  • #44
It doesn't seem like it would be that convenient to work to me.

I got Ʃ F = m1(v1'-v1°)/(t√(1-(v1'+v1°)^2/4c^2) + m2(v2'-v2°)/(t√(1-(v2'+v2°)^2/4c^2)
 
Last edited:
  • #45
Use the four-momentum instead. That is what I was referring to above.
 
  • #46
DaleSpam said:
Use the four-momentum instead. That is what I was referring to above.

I would but I wouldn't even know what to put into that thing. I figured if you found one dimension you would have them all. What is a U^μ? The collision i gave was two vectors coming at each other, different velocities would have different vectors.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Undergrad Non-Inertial Relativistic Dynamics
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
Undergrad What about the Big Ben Paradox?
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
7K
Undergrad How does an observer moving at relativistic speeds perceive a pulsar?
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
Undergrad Is momentum conserved as a body falls through a gravitational field?
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
Undergrad Conservation of momentum in a collision
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
7K
Graduate 1-Way Speed of Light
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
3K
Undergrad Relativistic Energy of Rotating Thin Ring: Quick Qs
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Undergrad Relativistic mass and gravitational potential
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
High School Relativistic simultaneity and effects on time
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
635
High School A Scenic Trip as a Spaceship at 0.999...c, and questions that arise
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
4K