Particle disappearing from view if it exceeds c

  • Thread starter Thread starter NanakiXIII
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Particle
NanakiXIII
Messages
391
Reaction score
0
I was working on a relativity problem in the context of electrodynamics and the problem was to show that a particle in hyperbolic motion (i.e. under the influence of a constant force) in one spatial dimension would never disappear from view for an observer at a position x once it was in view, providing its velocity did not exceed the speed of light. The idea was to draw some light cones on different points of the trajectory and indeed you can see that once the particle was visible at a point x at time t, that point x would lie within every light cone for later points in time.

What I don't see, however, is how the particle would ever disappear from view even if its velocity did exceed c. If you draw a trajectory for a particle with velocity 2c or 20c, you can still draw a line with slope -1 from each point on the time axis to some point on the trajectory and the light from the particle emitted at that point could still reach the observer at x=0. The light would be badly Dopplershifted and from some points you would see the particle moving backwards, but you would still see it.

My book, however, explicitly states that the particle would disappear from view if its velocity exceeds the speed of light, so apparently I'm making some error in my thinking here. In my reasoning there also seems to be an asymmetry in the situation (namely that when the particle is moving towards an observer, it seems it would be moving backwards while it would just seem Dopplershifted when moving away from an observer - this I conclude from looking at subsequent light cones I drew), which I'm not sure should be there. If anyone could point out what my error is, I'd appreciate it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Just looking at the space-time diagram, I agree with you. Any signal emitted by the particle intercepts my world-line sometime in the finite-future. But there will come a time when the signal is red-shifted to zero, which is the same thing as disappearing from view (in my interpretation).
 
Ah, that is true. If its velocity exceeds c at some point due to the acceleration, it'll be shifted to zero as it crosses that barrier. I wonder what the meaning of imaginary red-shift would be. Thanks for your reply.
 
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...
Back
Top