Momentum in the time direction

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation of the stress-energy tensor and the relationship between momentum in the time direction and energy. Participants explore the definitions of the momentum four-vector and its components, particularly focusing on the time component and its implications in the context of relativistic physics.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion regarding the phrase "momentum in the time direction is energy," noting that the time component of the momentum four-vector appears to represent momentum rather than energy.
  • Another participant suggests that the confusion may stem from a missing conversion factor of c, explaining that the time component can be understood as energy divided by c to maintain dimensional consistency with spatial momentum components.
  • A different perspective is offered, stating that momentum can be viewed as energy flux and that even in a particle's rest frame, it is still moving through time, which can be interpreted as momentum in the time direction.
  • A participant acknowledges the clarification regarding the conversion factor and expresses ongoing confusion about the dimensions and units of the components of the stress-energy tensor, questioning whether they all correspond to joules per cubic meter.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the interpretation of the time component of the momentum four-vector and its relationship to energy. Multiple viewpoints are presented, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the dimensional consistency of the stress-energy tensor components.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved questions regarding the assumptions about the units and dimensions of the stress-energy tensor components, as well as the role of constants like c in the definitions provided.

snoopies622
Messages
852
Reaction score
29
I'm trying to understand the stress-energy tensor and I keep seeing the phrase, "momentum in the time direction is energy". I don't understand this. In the definitions of the momentum four-vector that I've found, the time component is the object's rest mass times the speed of light times gamma.

Here's an example:
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/MomentumFour-Vector.html

This gives units of momentum, not of energy. What am I missing?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
snoopies622 said:
I'm trying to understand the stress-energy tensor and I keep seeing the phrase, "momentum in the time direction is energy". I don't understand this. In the definitions of the momentum four-vector that I've found, the time component is the object's rest mass times the speed of light times gamma.

Here's an example:
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/MomentumFour-Vector.html

This gives units of momentum, not of energy. What am I missing?
You are just missing a conversion factor of c. This is common when using 4-vectors. Remember that the first coordinate of a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-vector" . In this case the timelike component is E/c in order to make it dimensionally consistent with the spacelike momentum components. But E/c is still understood to represent energy in the same way that ct represents time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Momentum is energy flux. Classically (pre-Einstein) one thinks of momentum as the result of movement through space. Consider a particle in its rest frame (v = 0). Is it still moving? Absolutely: It's moving from one second to the next (through time). This is momentum in the time direction.

Schutz's book has a great chapter on this very topic.
 
Last edited:
Thank you all, especially DaleSpam. I suspected that it was simply a matter of leaving out c (selecting units so that c=1) but wasn't certain.

Up to now I've been confused about how the stress-energy tensor is put together because the components as named (energy density, momentum density, viscosity, etc.) all seem to have different dimensions/units. Are they all actually joules per cubic meter? Are the c's the only invisible constants/variables?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 113 ·
4
Replies
113
Views
10K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
7K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K