Physics Emergency: Two Trains Moving Away at 51% Light Speed

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rico Bamchug
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Physics
Rico Bamchug
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Okay, I made a statement in another forum completely unrelated to physics and I believe it to be wrong even though I made the statement in good faith. (Which is to say, I THOUGHT I knew what I was talking about.)

So please, if you can, bail me out.

Two trains are moving away from each other, both traveling at 51% the speed of light. In one train, viewing the other, would it appear to be traveling at 102% the speed of light?

Okay, that's it! Any help will be greatly appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Rico Bamchug said:
Okay, I made a statement in another forum completely unrelated to physics and I believe it to be wrong even though I made the statement in good faith. (Which is to say, I THOUGHT I knew what I was talking about.)

So please, if you can, bail me out.

Two trains are moving away from each other, both traveling at 51% the speed of light. In one train, viewing the other, would it appear to be traveling at 102% the speed of light?
Nope, you have to use the relativistic velocity addition formula here--in one train's frame, the other train will be moving at (0.51c + 0.51c)/(1 + 0.51^2) = 0.80946c, i.e. 80.946% the speed of light.
 
Awesome! And thank you Jesse!
 
Whenever you talk about this kind of problem, it helps to always add "as measured ..." When you say a train is moving at 0.51c, state relative to what or measured relative to what. That helps keep things straight.
 
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