Relativistic and non-relativisitic kinetic energy

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves determining the speed at which the relativistic kinetic energy expression diverges from the non-relativistic expression by 5%. The context includes the equations for both types of kinetic energy.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss how to find the relative difference between the two kinetic energy expressions. There is uncertainty about the correct approach to set up the equation and simplify it.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on how to approach the problem, suggesting the use of relative difference. However, there is still confusion regarding the algebraic manipulation of the resulting equations, and multiple interpretations of the steps are being explored.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted typo in the equations discussed, which has led to further questioning about the correct formulation. Participants express difficulty in simplifying the algebraic expressions derived from the kinetic energy equations.

lola2000
Messages
12
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


at what speed does the expression for relativistic kinetic energy vary from the non-relativistic expression by 5%?


Homework Equations


Relativistic kinetic energy K=(gamma-1)mc^2
Non-relativistic kinetic energy K=0.5mv^2


The Attempt at a Solution


I'm not sure how to attempt this!
Should I be finding the difference? ie K(relativistic)-K(non-relativistic)=0.05??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi lola2000, welcome to PF!:smile:

lola2000 said:
Should I be finding the difference? ie K(relativistic)-K(non-relativistic)=0.05??

Close, you should be finding the relative difference |Krel-Knon-rel|/Knon-rel=0.05 ... make sense?
 
I see, that makes sense.

But when I do this I get
0.05 = [(gamma-1)mc^2 - 0.5mc^2] / 0.5mv^2
which simplifies to
0.6mv^2 = (gamma-1)mc^2
0.6v^2/c^2 +1 = gamma

which is really nasty to solve! Is there a trick I have missed?
 
lola2000 said:
I see, that makes sense.

But when I do this I get
0.05 = [(gamma-1)mc^2 - 0.5mc^2[/color]] / 0.5mv^2

I assume this is a typo?

which simplifies to
0.6mv^2 = (gamma-1)mc^2

Really?
 
You are right!
That was a typo - it should have been -0.5mv^2

But I am still stuck with the algebra

I have 0.525v^2/c^2 = gamma - 1

How do I rearrange this??

It is not simplifying!
 
lola2000 said:
You are right!
That was a typo - it should have been -0.5mv^2

But I am still stuck with the algebra

I have 0.525v^2/c^2 = gamma - 1

How do I rearrange this??

It is not simplifying!

I did not check the previous steps so I cannot guarantee this is the correct equation. But assuming it is, you just need to add 1 to both sides (to have gamma isolated). Then square both sides and rename [tex]v^2/c^2 = X[/tex] . Then you will have a quadratic equation for X. Solve, keep only the positive root. That will be [tex]v^2/c^2[/tex]. Then the answer is the square root of X.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
9K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 102 ·
4
Replies
102
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
9K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K