# Relativistic Effects on Particles and Gases

• A
• Sabertooth
In summary, the conversation discusses the velocity of gas particles at different temperatures and the potential impact of special relativity on their movement. The experts mention that at reasonable conditions, gas molecules do not reach relativistic speeds and that the ideal gas laws can be used to calculate their velocities. However, at extremely high temperatures and pressures, the behavior of gas particles may need to be studied using the physics of high-energy, high-density plasmas. The conversation also touches on the concept of the Hagedorn temperature and its relationship to the evaporation of matter into Quark Gluon Plasma. The experts suggest that there is no maximum velocity for gas particles, but rather a range of velocities can be found. Overall, the conversation delves into the
Sabertooth
TL;DR Summary
Identifying Relativistic Effects in Thermodynamic Systems
Hello everyone, I was doing some calculations recently regarding particle velocities for different elements at different temperatures and I have a few questions for the experts in here.
Usual gas laws in my school book provides information about the velocity of particles in gases, it provides the V_rms, V_avg & V_mp of particles as a function of temperature in Kelvin.

My question is whether we need to treat these particles under the terms dictated by special relativity when they start approaching the speed of light.
Is there relativistic in-variance under these circumstances or is the kinetic energy needed to accelerate particles determined by the "relative mass" of the objects

It seems information about this aspect of high temperature gases is lacking in a lot of resources online.
Also, a side question: Do we have any way of calculating the max velocity for a distribution of gas particles at specific temperatures?

What makes you think gas molecules move at relativistic speeds at any reasonable conditions? (Reasonable defined as one can make a container of them) Room temperature is about 1/40 of an eV. A hydrogen molecule ways 2 GeV: so you need to be at > 10 trillion kelvins for this to be a substantial effect.

What makes you think gas molecules move at relativistic speeds at any reasonable conditions? (Reasonable defined as one can make a container of them) Room temperature is about 1/40 of an eV. A hydrogen molecule ways 2 GeV: so you need to be at > 10 trillion kelvins for this to be a substantial effect.

We learn some pretty cut and dry gas formulaes in school which help us get the RMS velocity and Avg velocity o. Any gas particle velocity can be calculated as a function of its temperature: V_avg = 8RT/Pi*M.

Temperature is defined as avg kinetic energy of molecules and kinetic energy is defined in terms of mass and velocity.

It's part of a deeper inquiry into the nature of Quark_Gluon Plasm and the Hagedorn temp.

Sabertooth said:
It seems information about this aspect of high temperature gases is lacking in a lot of resources online.

By the time you would need to start accounting for relativistic effects, you're very likely well into the plasma state of matter and dealing with high-energy, high-density plasmas.

Using our ideal gas laws, even at 100 billion kelvin the speed of a hydrogen atom would be roughly 57 million m/s, or 0.19c (non-relativistic calculation). This temperature is more than 6,000 times higher than the core of the Sun and is far, far above the ionization temperature of a gas, making the material a plasma. A cubic meter volume with one mol of this substance would require over 800 billion pascals of pressure, or over 8 million atmospheres, to contain it.

Sabertooth said:
It's part of a deeper inquiry into the nature of Quark_Gluon Plasm and the Hagedorn temp.

At these temperatures and pressures the ideal gas law is almost certainly not used for calculations requiring any real degree of accuracy. You'd need to look into the physics of high-temp, high-density plasmas, high-energy physics, and the details of quantum chromodynamics.

Sabertooth said:
Also, a side question: Do we have any way of calculating the max velocity for a distribution of gas particles at specific temperatures?

There is no maximum velocity. There is instead a range of velocities that you can find the average, peak, rms velocity, etc. This is because multi-body interactions in a gas or plasma can accelerate particles to velocities that are much higher than the average.

"By the time you would need to start accounting for relativistic effects, you're very likely well into the plasma state of matter and dealing with high-energy, high-density plasmas.

Using our ideal gas laws, even at 100 billion kelvin the speed of a hydrogen atom would be roughly 57 million m/s, or 0.19c (non-relativistic calculation). This temperature is more than 6,000 times higher than the core of the Sun and is far, far above the ionization temperature of a gas, making the material a plasma. A cubic meter volume with one mol of this substance would require over 800 billion pascals of pressure, or over 8 million atmospheres, to contain it. "

What kind of Plasma would that be? The Hagedorn temp specifically defines the point at which matter start evaporating into Quark Gluon Plasma. For the Proton that temperature should be quite specific and it's very imprecisely defined as being between 145 Mev to 175 Mev, which is around 1.6E12 to 2.2 E12 Kelvin.

I¨'m doing some calculation to derive a more accurate estimate based on the kinetic energy of the indivdual particles. I have gotten some interesting figures, but I'm unsure if my assumptions are correct, but the values line up with current data.

How does relativity influence the motion of high velocity particles. Does the energy expenditure to accelerate particles increase if we account for relativistic effect, or could there be some type of zero-sum cancelling causing the system to have relativistic invariance. There seems to be little information or agreement on this question from scientists. "There is no maximum velocity. There is instead a range of velocities that you can find the average, peak, rms velocity, etc. This is because multi-body interactions in a gas or plasma can accelerate particles to velocities that are much higher than the average."

There must be a reasonable statistical distribution that you can apply. Surely a 100 000 degree kelvin gas cannot ever reach anything close to Speed of light, and we know light speed is max speed.

Last edited:
What makes you think gas molecules move at relativistic speeds at any reasonable conditions? (Reasonable defined as one can make a container of them) Room temperature is about 1/40 of an eV. A hydrogen molecule ways 2 GeV: so you need to be at > 10 trillion kelvins for this to be a substantial effect.

Not quite 10 trillion. Relativistic effect should be clearly present already at 1 trillion kelvin if they behave in the usual Lorentzian fashion.

@Sabertooth please learn to use the quote feature rather than putting quotes in BOLD like that, as it appears to be screaming.

phinds said:
@Sabertooth please learn to use the quote feature rather than putting quotes in BOLD like that, as it appears to be screaming.

Sure thing. My first day here, so hopefully I'm excused.

So, despite saying "elements" you expected us to figure out you were talking about a QGP. You aslo decided β = 0.4 is too relativistic and you want β = 0.04.

How about asking us what you have in mind rather than having us guess and you saying "no, that's not it". That game gets old quick.

Sabertooth said:
What kind of Plasma would that be?

I don't know if there are different 'types' of plasmas as the temperature and pressure increase, so I can't answer this question.

Sabertooth said:
How does relativity influence the motion of high velocity particles. Does the energy expenditure to accelerate particles increase if we account for relativistic effect, or could there be some type of zero-sum cancelling causing the system to have relativistic invariance. There seems to be little information or agreement on this question from scientists.

I'm not sure what you mean. The energy required to accelerate an object by a unit of velocity only increases as the velocity increases. So accelerating from 500,000 to 500,001 m/s takes more energy than accelerating from 0 to 1 m/s. This is a well agreed upon fact of relativity and is often the explanation given to explain why you can't reach or exceed the speed of light.

Sabertooth said:
There must be a reasonable statistical distribution that you can apply. Surely a 100 000 degree kelvin gas cannot ever reach anything close to Speed of light, and we know light speed is max speed.

Well, I guess if you know the total energy of the gas you can calculate the maximum conceivable energy a single particle of that gas could ever be given in some incredibly remote multi-body interaction event, so I guess you could calculate a maximum speed that way. Other than that it's a smooth distribution of velocities, with the distribution curve changing as the temperature changes.

Drakkith said:
I don't know if there are different 'types' of plasmas as the temperature and pressure increase, so I can't answer this question.

I'm not sure what you mean. The energy required to accelerate an object by a unit of velocity only increases as the velocity increases. So accelerating from 500,000 to 500,001 m/s takes more energy than accelerating from 0 to 1 m/s. This is a well agreed upon fact of relativity and is often the explanation given to explain why you can't reach or exceed the speed of light.

It's a well agreed upon fact in non-thermodynamic systems.
Mosengeil's Formula also dictates that temperature changes with the Lorentz factor as you increase velocity. That is to say a moving body with respect to a stationary observer, gets colder as it increases velocity.

That is not the issue at hand though. Relativistic thermodynamics is much less agreed upon and there seems to be a starvation of information regarding the topic online.
It seems to me that there could be a major difference in the way relativity treats masses in thermodynamic systems as opposed to the way it deals with observer-variant special relativity.

Last edited:
So, despite saying "elements" you expected us to figure out you were talking about a QGP. You aslo decided β = 0.4 is too relativistic and you want β = 0.04.

How about asking us what you have in mind rather than having us guess and you saying "no, that's not it". That game gets old quick.

I think you messed up your calculations. At 1 trillions Kelvin avg velocity will be approx. 0.5 β.
10 trillion K would make no sense as the avg would be above the speed of light. It is also beyond the Hagedown Temperature thus making hadrons ustable.

I already told you what I was looking for. A coherent breakdown of the relativistic effects on thermodynamic systems, particularly particle energies.

Drakkith said:
Well, I guess if you know the total energy of the gas you can calculate the maximum conceivable energy a single particle of that gas could ever be given in some incredibly remote multi-body interaction event, so I guess you could calculate a maximum speed that way. Other than that it's a smooth distribution of velocities, with the distribution curve changing as the temperature changes.

That's the exact thing I'm looking for, the maximal velocity to be achieved by one single particle in a distribution of particles at a given temperature.

Sabertooth said:
That is not the issue at hand though. Relativistic thermodynamics is much less agreed upon and there seems to be a starvation of information regarding the topic online.
It seems to me that there could be a major difference in the way relativity treats masses in thermodynamic systems as opposed to the way it deals with observer-variant special relativity.

Well, I doubt there's any serious disagreements in this area, but I wouldn't expect to find too much easily digestible information online since this is a fairly advanced and specialized topic. I'm not an expert in either relativity or thermodynamics, so I unfortunately can't offer you much advice. Best of luck to you though.

Drakkith said:
Well, I doubt there's any serious disagreements in this area, but I wouldn't expect to find too much easily digestible information online since this is a fairly advanced and specialized topic. I'm not an expert in either relativity or thermodynamics, so I unfortunately can't offer you much advice. Best of luck to you though.

Apparently, it's shrouded in much historical controversy. Here's an excerpt from a 2002 article:

Relativistic thermodynamics is a highly controversial discipline on issues such as the variance of temperature or the heat; the results concerning these two quantities (T and Q), of Planck-Einstein (1907) were reversed in 1963 by the physicist Ott in moreover following a suggestion formulated by Einstein himself in 1952. Since then there have been two main schools of thermodynamics relativistic with a series of variants.
The somewhat strange status of relativistic thermodynamics invites questions about somewhat “special” relationships that maintain the ethereal RR and thermodynamics. Existence of several schools within this discipline is due to the fact that there is no of unequivocal definition, in particular of temperature in a system moving

Well, there we go then. You learn something new every day.

I have little to no idea about the topic at hand, but I know that Hänggi and Dunkel worked on this topic quite a bit and I remember attending a talk on that topic eternities ago and surprisingly the slides still seem to be online:

One of the main publications they discussed was Dunkel et al., "Non-local observables and lightcone-averaging in relativistic thermodynamics", Nature Physics 5, 741 (2009).

I have no idea whether that is useful to you, but maybe it is helpful to check the papers cited in that paper and also newer publications citing that paper to find what you are looking for.

Sabertooth
Cthugha said:
I have little to no idea about the topic at hand, but I know that Hänggi and Dunkel worked on this topic quite a bit and I remember attending a talk on that topic eternities ago and surprisingly the slides still seem to be online:

One of the main publications they discussed was Dunkel et al., "Non-local observables and lightcone-averaging in relativistic thermodynamics", Nature Physics 5, 741 (2009).

I have no idea whether that is useful to you, but maybe it is helpful to check the papers cited in that paper and also newer publications citing that paper to find what you are looking for.

Definitely a lot of useful information contained in those slides. Thank you.

## 1. What are relativistic effects on particles and gases?

Relativistic effects refer to the changes in the behavior and properties of particles and gases when they are moving at speeds close to the speed of light. These effects include time dilation, length contraction, and mass increase.

## 2. How do relativistic effects impact the behavior of particles and gases?

Relativistic effects can significantly alter the behavior of particles and gases. For example, time dilation can cause time to pass slower for a moving particle compared to a stationary observer, and length contraction can cause objects to appear shorter in the direction of motion. These effects also affect the mass and energy of particles and gases.

## 3. What is the significance of relativistic effects in particle accelerators?

Relativistic effects play a crucial role in particle accelerators, where particles are accelerated to very high speeds. These effects are necessary to consider for accurate predictions and calculations in particle collisions and experiments.

## 4. How do relativistic effects impact the behavior of gases in astrophysics?

In astrophysics, relativistic effects are essential for understanding the behavior of gases in extreme environments, such as near black holes or in the early universe. These effects can significantly impact the dynamics and evolution of gases in these environments.

## 5. Can relativistic effects be observed in everyday life?

Relativistic effects are typically only noticeable at very high speeds, close to the speed of light. In everyday life, these speeds are not typically reached, so relativistic effects are not observed. However, they can be observed in certain situations, such as in particle accelerators or in high-speed space travel.

• DIY Projects
Replies
28
Views
2K
• Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
16
Views
1K
• Atomic and Condensed Matter
Replies
1
Views
817
• Atomic and Condensed Matter
Replies
0
Views
334
• Atomic and Condensed Matter
Replies
2
Views
2K
• Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
891
• Cosmology
Replies
1
Views
3K
• Mechanics
Replies
27
Views
14K
• Materials and Chemical Engineering
Replies
1
Views
394
• Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
1K