Question about energy in C-O-M frame and Lab frame.

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter sukho
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Frame Lab
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation of energy in the center of momentum (C-O-M) frame compared to the laboratory frame, as presented in a classical mechanics textbook. Participants explore the implications of energy definitions and the context of specific equations related to momentum and energy in both frames.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the textbook's assertion that energy in the C-O-M frame is greater than in the laboratory frame, suggesting it should be less.
  • Another participant agrees, referencing a theorem in mechanics that indicates kinetic energy is minimized when the center of mass is at rest.
  • A different participant introduces the concept of total 4-momentum and its invariance across frames, stating that energy is minimized in the C-O-M frame where spatial momentum is zero.
  • Some participants express the need for context from the textbook to clarify the statement, suggesting it might relate to available energy in colliding beam accelerators.
  • One participant shares the specific reference from the textbook and notes confusion regarding a footnote that seems to support the context but is unclear.
  • Another participant points out that the quoted text refers to the sum of energies of two particles, questioning the interpretation of the energy being minimum when spatial momentum is zero due to the negative sign in the invariant energy-momentum relation.
  • One participant ultimately decides to disregard the context provided by the textbook, indicating uncertainty about its relevance.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the interpretation of energy in the C-O-M frame versus the laboratory frame. Multiple competing views remain, particularly concerning the implications of the textbook's statements and the context of the equations referenced.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved questions regarding the definitions and assumptions related to energy and momentum in different frames, particularly concerning the specific equations referenced in the textbook and their implications for energy comparisons.

sukho
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hi, I just register to this site.
I'm reading a famous classical mechanics textbook. and it state that
'Since the spatial momentum in the C-O-m frame is zero, there is clearly more energy, p0, in this frame than in the laboratory frame.'

I think the energy in the center of momentum(C-O-M) frame should be less than in all other frame.
However, I've still not sure that it's right or wrong because this textbook is very famous.

Thanks.
PS. Should I states the name of the text?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
welcome to pf!

hi sukho! welcome to pf! :smile:

that certainly looks wrong, but i wonder what the context is

can you provide a link?​
 
sukho, you are correct, it should be less. It's a well-known theorem in mechanics that the kinetic energy of a system of particles can be written as a sum of two terms: T = ½ MV2 + ∑ ½ mivi2, where M is the total mass, V is the velocity of the center of mass, and vi are the velocities of the individual particles with respect to the center of mass. Clearly this is a minimum when V = 0.
 
Oops, just noticed this is the relativity group. Ok, even easier. The total 4-momentum of the system of particles is P = (E/c, p). This has norm P·P = (E/c)2 - p.p. Since the norm must be the same in all reference frames, E will be minimum in the center of mass frame where p = 0.
 
It would help, if you can give the exact reference, to see the context of that quote.
The book could be talking about available COM energy, which is larger in a colliding beam accelerator.
 
It would help, if you can give the exact reference, to see the context of that quote.
The book could be talking about available COM energy, which is larger in a colliding beam accelerator.
 
Hi, everyone.
The book I read is 'Classical Mechanics' 3ed by 'Goldstein Poole & Safko' on page 302 line 16
and if u see the footnote on this page, it's kind of support the context. I also confuse about the footnote too.
Thanks.
 
hi sukho! :wink:

i don't think that's available online …

can you post a picture? :smile:
 
Hi. I attached pdf file of the context.
The attached file is a page 302, Goldstein. and the context is on line 16.
Thanks.
 

Attachments

  • #10
hmm … it refers to equations (7.79) and (7.80) which are on the previous page :redface:
 
  • #11
sukho said:
Hi. I attached pdf file of the context.
The attached file is a page 302, Goldstein. and the context is on line 16.
Thanks.
Reading it in context, it does not make too much sense. I am not sure what their p^0 refers to.
Maybe just ignore that sentence.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #12
clem said:
Reading it in context, I see (as I thought) that G is referring to the sum of the energies of the two particles. Since E^2-p^2 is invariant, this is largest when p-0.


Why it's not minimum energy when p=0, as Bill_K said? it's minus sign before p^2.
and the I've attached the previous pages.
Thanks.
 

Attachments

  • #13
I think I'll just ignore that context.
Thank you guys.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • · Replies 75 ·
3
Replies
75
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K