Newtonian analogue for Lorentz invariant four-momentum norm

  • #1
425
23

Main Question or Discussion Point

Hi.

I read that the Lorentz invariance Minkowski norm of the four-momentum
$$E^2-c^2\cdot \mathbf{p}^2=m^2\cdot c^4$$
has no analogue in Newtonian physics. But what about
$$E-\frac{\mathbf{p}^2}{2m}=0\quad ?$$
It might look trivial by the definition of kinetic energy, but it's still a relation between energy and momentum that's invariant under Galilei transforms.
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
1,699
237
It's not a relation between energy and momentum but between kinetic energy and momentum. It doesn't work with the total energy.
 
  • #3
haushofer
Science Advisor
Insights Author
2,278
634
Where did you read it?

You're right; I think the idea is that the newtonian expression is not the inner product of two four-vectors, since such a product does not really exist in newtonian spacetime; there is no (non-degenerate) metric.
 
  • #4
robphy
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
5,490
720
The natural candidate is ##mu^a## where ##m## is the [rest] mass and ##u^a## is the 4-velocity.
Presumably, there is a mass-shell in energy-momentum space which would look similar to the [timelike but degenerate] Galilean metric.
In https://www.desmos.com/calculator/ti58l2sair, set E=0.
The temporal component would be ##m## (or in standard units of momentum ##mc## where ##c## is a convenient velocity unit with no other significance).
To get the spatial components ##m\vec v##, one would use the spacelike-but-degenerate Galilean metric.
(To do this right, one needs to first write down the postulated structure [e.g., (M,##t_a##, ##h^{ab}##, ...) akin to specifying (M,g) for a spacetime] then formulate the dynamics on it.)
You can do 4-momentum conservation by vector addition.. which amounts to conservation of mass and conservation of spatial-momentum.

Kinetic energy should really be calculated using the Work-energy-theorem.
 
  • #5
425
23
It's not a relation between energy and momentum but between kinetic energy and momentum. It doesn't work with the total energy.
So in the relativistic case, the equation is about total energy? Then I'm running into problems with an answer I got in a different thread:
Specifically for the electromagnetic field, the conserved energy is given by:

[itex]E = \gamma mc^2 + q \Phi[/itex]

where [itex]\Phi[/itex] is the electric potential.
Say the left side of
$$E^2=c^2\cdot \mathbf{p}^2+m^2\cdot c^4$$
is total energy squared. Consider two identical particles with the same velocity where one is in an electric potential and the other is not. Then their total energies are different, but their momentum is the same. So one of those particles must violate above equation.
 
  • #6
1,699
237
So in the relativistic case, the equation is about total energy?
Yes.

Then I'm running into problems with an answer I got in a different thread: [...]
I'm not sure if the term "total energy" makes much sense in this example. It doesn't refer to the total system because the source of the potential is not included.
 

Related Threads on Newtonian analogue for Lorentz invariant four-momentum norm

  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
11K
Replies
9
Views
6K
Replies
24
Views
4K
Replies
20
Views
13K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
8K
Top