Relative speed of orbiting rockets in Schwarzschild metric

In summary: A trick is to use invariance in 4-vectors. Given that the 4-momentum is ##P = \gamma(c,\vec u)## and using invariance ##U \cdot V = U^{'} \cdot V^{'}## (Hint: Which frames would you use?), how would you find ##\gamma_w## in terms of ##\gamma_u,...,\gamma_v##?
  • #1
zimo123
18
0

Homework Statement


Two rockets are orbiting a Schwarzschild black hole of mass M, in a circular path at some location R in the equatorial plane θ=π/2. The first (rocket A) is orbiting with an angular velocity Ω=dΦ/dt and the second (rocket B) with -Ω (they orbit in opposite directions).

Find the speed of B as measured by A, whenever they meet. Equivalently, find the relative Lorentz factor.

Homework Equations


Schwarzschild metric with dr=dθ=0.

The Attempt at a Solution



I have calculated the four-velocity components of each rocket in terms of M, R and Ω.
[tex]\frac{\mathrm{d}\phi}{\mathrm{d}\tau}=\frac{\pm\Omega}{\sqrt{1-2M/R-R^2\Omega^2}}[/tex]
[tex]\frac{\mathrm{d}t}{\mathrm{d}\tau}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-2M/R-R^2\Omega^2}}[/tex]

Obviously the other two components are zero.

According to my textbook (Hartle), observed quantities correspond to projections on the observers' basis vectors. I know I should compute the relative velocity with:

[tex]V=\frac{\vec{u_B}\cdot\vec{e_{\phi}}}{\vec{u_B}\cdot\vec{e_t}}[/tex]

where e_t and e_Φ are the coordinate basis vectors of the observer (in this case of rocket A) and u_B the four-velocity of rocket B (with the -Ω). The problem is I don't understand why I should divide by the projection onto e_t. For example, when we calculate the measured energy, one only has to project on the relevant basis vector:

[tex]E=-\vec{p}\cdot\vec{e_t}[/tex]

Or for the momentum

[tex]P=\vec{p}\cdot\vec{e_r}[/tex]

Thanks for your help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I suggest starting by computing the relative gamma factor. How would you do that in SR?
 
  • #3
Orodruin said:
I suggest starting by computing the relative gamma factor. How would you do that in SR?
Actually I am not sure what that means ... Is it just:
[tex]\frac{\gamma_B}{\gamma_A}=\frac{(\mathrm{d}t/\mathrm{d}\tau)_B}{(\mathrm{d}t/\mathrm{d}\tau)_A}[/tex]
 
  • #4
No. You can express it in a manifestly coordinate invariant fashion. What is the gamma factor?
 
  • #5
Orodruin said:
No. You can express it in a manifestly coordinate invariant fashion. What is the gamma factor?

As Orodruin said, try expressing ##\frac{d\tau}{dt}## using the schwarzschild metric. It might be helpful to first write down the metric.
 
  • #6
Orodruin said:
No. You can express it in a manifestly coordinate invariant fashion. What is the gamma factor?
The γ factor is dt/dτ, which is the time-component of the 4-velocity. I have already expressed it above in the derived equations.
 
  • #7
unscientific said:
As Orodruin said, try expressing ##\frac{d\tau}{dt}## using the schwarzschild metric. It might be helpful to first write down the metric.
I already did that, see my first post in the attempt at a solution part.
 
  • #8
zimo123 said:
I already did that, see my first post in the attempt at a solution part.
Ok good.Now given ##\gamma_A## and ##\gamma_B## how do you relate them with ##\gamma_w## where ##\vec w## is the relative velocity? You can do that the standard way or using the rapidity approach.
 
  • #9
unscientific said:
Ok good.Now given ##\gamma_A## and ##\gamma_B## how do you relate them with ##\gamma_w## where ##\vec w## is the relative velocity? You can do that the standard way or using the rapidity approach.
I would think it is the ratio between the two as I previously posted. That would measure how the proper time of A ellapses relative to the proper time of B.
 
  • #10
zimo123 said:
I would think it is the ratio between the two as I previously posted. That would measure how the proper time of A ellapses relative to the proper time of B.

(proper time of A)/(Proper time of B) is NOT proper time of B in A's frame.

You want ##\gamma_w##, proper time of B in A's frame. In short, ##\gamma_w \neq
\frac{\gamma_B}{\gamma_A}=\frac{(\mathrm{d}t/\mathrm{d}\tau)_B}{(\mathrm{d}t/\mathrm{d}\tau)_A} ##.
 
  • #11
unscientific said:
(proper time of A)/(Proper time of B) is NOT proper time of B in A's frame.

You want ##\gamma_w##, proper time of B in A's frame. In short, ##\gamma_w \neq
\frac{\gamma_B}{\gamma_A}=\frac{(\mathrm{d}t/\mathrm{d}\tau)_B}{(\mathrm{d}t/\mathrm{d}\tau)_A} ##.
Proper time of B in A's frame ? Isn't the notion of proper time tied to one reference frame ? i.e. there is just one proper time of B: that measured by B.
Or do you mean "how would A compute the proper time of B?" In which case I would guess by creating two new 4 velocity vectors, one in which A is stationary and one describing the relative motion of B to A. I have tried doing that but unsuccessfully...
 
  • #12
zimo123 said:
Proper time of B in A's frame ? Isn't the notion of proper time tied to one reference frame ? i.e. there is just one proper time of B: that measured by B.
Or do you mean "how would A compute the proper time of B?" In which case I would guess by creating two new 4 velocity vectors, one in which A is stationary and one describing the relative motion of B to A. I have tried doing that but unsuccessfully...

Particle A has velocity ##\vec u##. Particle B has velocity ##\vec v##. Relative velocity (also B's velocity in A's rest frame) between them is ##\vec w##.

How do you find ##\gamma_w## in terms of ##\gamma_u, \gamma_v##?

A trick is to use invariance in 4-vectors. Given that the 4-momentum is ##P = \gamma(c,\vec u)## and using invariance ##U \cdot V = U^{'} \cdot V^{'}## (Hint: Which frames would you use?), how would you find ##\gamma_w## in terms of ##\gamma_u, \gamma_v##?
 
  • #13
unscientific said:
As Orodruin said, try expressing ##\frac{d\tau}{dt}## using the schwarzschild metric. It might be helpful to first write down the metric.

I never said to do this. This is not a necessary step, although you will need the metric tensor.

zimo123 said:
The γ factor is dt/dτ, which is the time-component of the 4-velocity. I have already expressed it above in the derived equations.
No, expressing the relative gamma factor this way using the coordinate is too SR and not the way to go.

Can you think of an expression which is manifestly Lorentz invariant and evaluates to the relative gamma factor between the 4-velocities U and V regardless of the frame it is evaluated in?
 
  • #14
Orodruin said:
No, expressing the relative gamma factor this way using the coordinate is too SR and not the way to go.

Can you think of an expression which is manifestly Lorentz invariant and evaluates to the relative gamma factor between the 4-velocities U and V regardless of the frame it is evaluated in?
Using the mass-energy equivalence principle?
[tex]E^2-\vec{p}\cdot\vec{p}=m^2[/tex]
 
  • #15
zimo123 said:
Using the mass-energy equivalence principle?
[tex]E^2-\vec{p}\cdot\vec{p}=m^2[/tex]
No, there are no masses involved. You only have the 4-velocities.
 
  • #16
Orodruin said:
No, there are no masses involved. You only have the 4-velocities.
I know the norm of any 4-vector is Lorentz invariant, but the only expression which comes to mind that contains the gamma factor would be the energy.
[tex]E=-\vec{p}\cdot\vec{e_t}=m\gamma[/tex]
I guess the mass from the momentum ##\vec{p}## and from the right hand side would cancel.
 
  • #17
You really should drop the masses, the only thing they do here is to obfuscate what is going on. How would you express the gamma factor using the 4-velocity? (Hint: how is the 4-momentum and 4-velocity related.) What gamma factor is it that you get out of doing so? It needs to be relative to something. What vector does ##\vec e_t## represent for an observer at rest in the particular frame?
 
  • Like
Likes unscientific

1. What is the Schwarzschild metric?

The Schwarzschild metric is a solution to Einstein's field equations in general relativity that describes the geometry of spacetime around a non-rotating, spherically symmetric mass. It is often used to study the effects of gravity on objects in close proximity to massive bodies, such as planets orbiting a star.

2. How does the Schwarzschild metric affect the relative speed of orbiting rockets?

The Schwarzschild metric introduces a curvature of spacetime near the massive body, which affects the path of objects moving through it. This results in a difference in the relative speed of orbiting rockets compared to what would be expected in a flat spacetime.

3. How is the relative speed of orbiting rockets in the Schwarzschild metric calculated?

The relative speed of orbiting rockets can be calculated using the equations of motion in general relativity, which take into account the effects of the Schwarzschild metric on the trajectory of the rockets. This calculation also depends on the mass and distance of the massive body, as well as the initial velocity of the rockets.

4. Does the relative speed of orbiting rockets change as they move further away from the massive body?

Yes, the relative speed of orbiting rockets in the Schwarzschild metric changes as they move further away from the massive body. This is because the strength of the gravitational field, and therefore the curvature of spacetime, decreases with distance. As a result, the effects on the rockets' trajectory also decrease.

5. How does the relative speed of orbiting rockets in the Schwarzschild metric compare to that in Newtonian gravity?

In the Newtonian theory of gravity, the relative speed of orbiting rockets is constant and does not depend on the mass or distance of the massive body. In contrast, in the Schwarzschild metric, the relative speed changes due to the curvature of spacetime caused by the massive body. As the rockets move closer to the massive body, the relative speed increases compared to what would be expected in Newtonian gravity.

Similar threads

  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top