Physicist Needed to Verify Relativistic Derivations?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ManyNames
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Physicist
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the verification of relativistic derivations, specifically the equations E² - (pc)² = (Mc²)² and p² = η^{μν}p_μp_ν = - (E/c²)² + p². The original poster seeks assistance from a physicist to identify any mistakes in their derivations. However, a participant suggests that a mathematician is more appropriate for this task, as the equations presented appear to be mathematically sound. The discussion highlights the importance of both physics and mathematics in verifying complex equations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of relativistic equations and concepts
  • Familiarity with invariant mass and its mathematical representation
  • Knowledge of the metric tensor η^{μν} in relativistic physics
  • Basic proficiency in mathematical derivations and proofs
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of invariant mass in relativistic physics
  • Learn about the role of the metric tensor in general relativity
  • Explore advanced mathematical techniques for verifying physical equations
  • Investigate common errors in relativistic derivations and how to avoid them
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, mathematicians, and students engaged in advanced studies of relativity and mathematical physics will benefit from this discussion.

ManyNames
Messages
136
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I need a physicist to look over these derivations and help me see if there are any mistakes. Thank you in advance, it is much appreciated.

Homework Equations



- reltivistic math derivations

The Attempt at a Solution



The First Part

[tex]E^2-(pc)^2=(Mc^2)^2[/tex] where the expression [tex](Mc^2)^2[/tex] is by definition, the squared mathematical precision of an ''invariant mass'', hence, [tex]Mc^4[/tex].

[tex]\rightarrow Mv(\frac{E}{M})=Mc^2(v)[/tex]

allow [tex]v=c[/tex] then this simplifies to [tex]Mv^3=Mc^2[/tex] (Just to show that these are relativistic equivalances without the need of gamma function. This now leads me to calculate:

[tex]Mv(E)(\frac{D}{v})=Mc^2.v[/tex]

The Second Part

my equation, albiet as simple as it is, will show its importance throughout the metric work:

[1] [tex]M(1+M)=2M[/tex] if

[2] [tex]-(\frac{E}{c})^2+mv^2=p^2[/tex]

then combine by division of [1] and [2] equations, allowing the relativistic proof:

[tex]\frac{\eta^{\mu v}p_{\mu}p_{\mu}}{2m}=\frac{p^2}{2m}=\frac{p^2}{2}\frac{E}{c^2}[/tex]

which then follows

[tex]p^2=\eta^{\mu v}p_{mu}p_{v}=-(\frac{E}{c^2})^2+p^2[/tex]

I need to go the now, i will finish this later, but sooner than later.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
ManyNames said:
[tex]E^2-(pc)^2=(Mc^2)^2[/tex]
That is true

ManyNames said:
[tex]\frac{\eta^{\mu v}p_{\mu}p_{\mu}}{2m}=\frac{p^2}{2m}[/tex]
That is true.

ManyNames said:
I need a physicist to look over these derivations
No you need a mathematician. Because those are also the only equations I could find that don't have (mathematical) errors in them.
 
CompuChip said:
That is true

No you need a mathematician. Because those are also the only equations I could find that don't have (mathematical) errors in them.

That is true, friend.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
46
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K