# Morin relativistic rocket example (chapter 12, page 606)

• I
Hello all.

In Morin's classical mechanics book, chapter 12 (relativistic dynamics), in the axample about the relativistic rocket, we have a rocket that propels itself converting mass into photons and firing them back. Here Morin takes dm as a negative quantity, so the instantaneous mass of the rocket goes from m to m+dm.

I have tried to solve the same example taking dm as a positive quantity, and assuming that the instantaneous mass goes from m to m-dm, but I do not get the same answer. The correct rocket motion equation should be:

(dm/m)+(dv/(1-v2))=0

(dm/m)-(dv/(1-v2))=0

As you see, the solution is the same, except for one minus sign.
What could be the problem? Any ideas?

Thank you so much.

If dm is a positive quantity in one equation and a negative quantity in the other then it is the same equation.

Yes, that is what I thought.

Nevertheless, in Morin example he integrates this equiation from M to m and from 0 to v to get:

m=M[(1-v)/(1+v)]1/2

But if I integrate my equation in the same terms (from M to m and from 0 to v ), what I get is:

m=M[(1+v)/(1-v)]1/2

As you see, the signs are exchanged in the quotient, so the result is nor the same.

What is the problem?

robphy
Homework Helper
Gold Member
This sounds like it might be a confusion between
the use and/or interpretation of an "infinitesimal change in mass" [whose sign depends on whether one adds or subtracts]
and as an "increment of the mass variable m" (used in doing an integral) [which is always positive].

I think it might analogous to this [my reply in an old thread]
Dot product in the Gravitational Potential Energy formula

PAllen
2019 Award
Ah, then per robphy's point if the OP reverses the limits of integration, they will get the same answer as the other method.

robphy
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Or is that, when ##dm## changes sign (in the attempted change of variables)
then ##v## (or ##dv##) changes sign?

Confusing, isn't it?

robphy
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Confusing, isn't it?
It could be, if one isn't careful.

I took a closer look.
Let's clarify variable names.
m is the instantaneous rocket-mass function (which varies with time).
dm is the incremental change in that rocket-mass function (following what Morin is doing)
so that m+dm represents the new mass (which is smaller than the old mass since the increment is a negative amount).
M is the original mass.

Now if you wish change variables
so that you can (better?) display the fact that the rocket-mass decreases,
let ##(d\mu)=-dm##;
this ##d\mu## is positive (which could be interpreted as the positive photon-energy ejected in the rocket-frame).

Following Morin,
the spatial-momentum of the rocket in the ground frame is
##(m\gamma v)_{new}=(m\gamma v)_{old}-\gamma(1-v)dm##
Using ##(d\mu)##,
##(m\gamma v)_{new}=(m\gamma v)_{old}-\gamma(1-v)(-d\mu)##,
which could be written as
##d(m\gamma v)= -\gamma(1-v)(-d\mu)##.
When expanding out the left-hand side, you have ##dm##, but you have ##d\mu## on the right-hand-side.
If you expand then try to combine terms (in favor of ##d\mu##) to get the diff eq, you get
##\frac{-d\mu}{m}+\frac{dv}{1-v^2}=0##.
However, you can't continue to solve for m unless you use ##d\mu=-dm##.

So, you are forced to same differential equation for ##m##.

jim mcnamara
All right, I see.

I will take a deeper look to it, to check if I really get it.

Thank you so much, I spent a lot of time thinking about it.