Relativistic Doppler Shift and a Star breaking up

  • #61
Lets see where I went wrong:

[tex]\beta( \frac{7.135*10^{14}}{(6.690*10^{14})\gamma} - 1)) = -\beta(\frac{ 4.282*10^{14}}{(6.690*10^{14})\gamma} - 1)[/tex]

[tex]\gamma = \sqrt{\frac{1}{1 - \beta^2}}[/tex]

So:

[tex]\beta( \frac{7.135*10^{14}}{(6.690*10^{14})(\sqrt{\frac{1}{1 - \beta^2}})} - 1)) = -\beta(\frac{ 4.282*10^{14}}{(6.690*10^{14})(\sqrt{\frac{1}{1 - \beta^2}})} - 1)[/tex]

Also, can't Gamma be expressed as:

[tex]\gamma = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - \beta^2}}[/tex]

??

TFM
 
  • #62
Yeah gamma can have that form too, I would have written like that but I couldn't get the latex to do it for me.
 
  • #63
So, first cancel out the exp. and the beta's:

[tex]\frac{7.135}{(6.690)\gamma} - 1 = -\frac{ 4.282}{(6.690)\gamma} + 1[/tex]

Reinsert gamma:

[tex]\frac{7.135}{(6.690)(\frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - \beta^2}} )} - 1 = -\frac{ 4.282}{(6.690)({\frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - \beta^2}}} )} + 1[/tex]

Multiiply out:

[tex]\frac{7.135}{(\frac{6.690}{\sqrt{1 - \beta^2}} )} - 1 = -\frac{ 4.282}{({\frac{6.690}{\sqrt{1 - \beta^2}}} )} + 1[/tex]

Move over the 1:

[tex]\frac{7.135}{(\frac{6.690}{\sqrt{1 - \beta^2}} )} = -\frac{ 4.282}{({\frac{6.690}{\sqrt{1 - \beta^2}}} )} + 2[/tex]

[tex]\frac{7.135}{(\frac{6.690}{\sqrt{1 - \beta^2}} )} + \frac{ 4.282}{({\frac{6.690}{\sqrt{1 - \beta^2}}} )} = 2[/tex]

Does this look okay?

TFM
 
  • #64
This can go to:

[tex]\frac{7.135(\sqrt{1 - \beta^2})}{6.690} + \frac{ 4.282( \sqrt{1 - \beta^2})}{6.690}} = 2[/tex]

get rid of denominator:

[tex]7.135(\sqrt{1 - \beta^2}) + 4.282( \sqrt{1 - \beta^2}) = 2*6.690[/tex]

This can go to:

[tex]11.417 (\sqrt{1 - \beta^2}) = 13.38[/tex]

and:

[tex]\sqrt{1 - \beta^2} = 13.38/11.417[/tex]

[tex]\sqrt{1 - \beta^2} = 1.172[/tex]

so square out the root:

[tex]1 - \beta^2 = 1.373[/tex]

and:

[tex]1 - 1.373 = \beta^2[/tex]

Is the data still wrong, or have I done something wrong, because I now get beta squared as
-0.373

??

TFM
 
  • #65
Your math looks fine, your answer is the same as my own. It's as Doc Al said, the data is wrong. Slightly annoying because I think it makes it impossible to find the angle, as requested in the second part, though I may be wrong.
 
  • #66
Yes, the data is wrong. When I checked it earlier, I used my own calculations (with correct expression for [itex]\gamma[/itex]).
 
  • #67
Hey all,

Is there a possibility that the answer is imaginary because one velocity is the negative of the other?

Vuldoraq
 
  • #68
I finally have the answer sheet for the question:

Quoted from Sheet:

Since the fragments have equal masses, they must have equal velocities. Using the general Doppler shift relation, we find that for one of the fragments

[tex]\frac{v prime}{v} = \frac{6.690*10^{-14}}{7.135*10{-14}} = 0.9376 = \gamma - \beta \gamma cos \theta[/tex]

whereas for the other

[tex]\frac{v prime}{v} = \frac{6.690*10^{-14}}{4.282*10{-14}} = 1.562 = \gamma + \beta \gamma cos \theta[/tex]

Adding these, we obtain 2γ =2.5 so γ =1.25=5/4 and so

[tex]\beta^2 = 1 - \frac{1}{\gamma^2} = 1 - \frac{16}{25} = \frac{9}{25}[/tex]

and therefore

[tex]\beta = \frac{3}{5} = 0.6[/tex]

which gives a velocity of 0.6 × 3×108 = 1.83 × 108 m/s.
Substituting back into the first equation of this part, we find

[tex]0.936 = 1.25(1 - 0.6cos \theta)[/tex]

[tex]0.75 = 1 - 0.6cos \theta[/tex]

[tex]cos \theta = \frac{0.25}{0.6}0.4167[/tex]

and so the angle is θ = 65.4°.

End Sheet Quote

TFM
 
  • #69
Yeah, I really messed this one up big time. I had reversed the primed and unprimed frequencies (mixing up source and observer). D'oh!

My apologies. :redface:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
8K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K