Relativistic Energy Equations: When to Use Each

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion clarifies the appropriate contexts for using the relativistic energy equations: \(E = \gamma mc^2\) and \(E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2\). The first equation is applicable when the mass and the Lorentz factor (\(\gamma\)) are known, typically for particles in motion. The second equation is more versatile, suitable for all scenarios, including massless particles like photons, as it accounts for both mass and momentum. It is recommended to use the second equation for its broader applicability and ease of use in various contexts.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of relativistic physics concepts
  • Familiarity with the Lorentz factor (\(\gamma\))
  • Knowledge of momentum in physics
  • Basic algebra for manipulating equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Lorentz factor (\(\gamma\)) in special relativity
  • Learn about the implications of massless particles in relativistic equations
  • Explore the relationship between energy, momentum, and velocity in relativistic contexts
  • Investigate classical versus relativistic mechanics to understand their differences
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators teaching relativity, and researchers in theoretical physics will benefit from this discussion, particularly those focusing on energy-momentum relationships in relativistic systems.

Kara386
Messages
204
Reaction score
2
When would I use the equation ##E = \gamma mc^2## and when would I use ##E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2##? I'm a little confused because my textbook calls them both total energy equations. I know that for a particle at rest it has energy ##E=mc^2##. It can't be at rest for the equation ##E = \gamma mc^2## because ##\gamma## involves velocity, so I assume the object has to be moving. So when do I use that equation? And when do I use the ##E^2## one?

Thanks for any help! :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Kara386 said:
When would I use the equation E=γmc^2 and when would I use E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2
I would recommend always using the second one. It reduces to the first whenever appropriate.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Kara386
You can use any of them for a particle at rest; gamma is just 1 for zero velocity. The formula with gamma is no good for light because it is undefined for speed c. The energy squared relation is good for all cases, including light. Obviously, m is 0 for light. For m not zero, you can demonstrate algebraically that it is the same as the gamma formula.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Kara386
Seems like the best thing then is to stick with the ##E^2## equation. Thanks! :)
 
Kara386 said:
When would I use the equation ##E = \gamma mc^2## and when would I use ##E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2##? I'm a little confused because my textbook calls them both total energy equations. I know that for a particle at rest it has energy ##E=mc^2##. It can't be at rest for the equation ##E = \gamma mc^2## because ##\gamma## involves velocity, so I assume the object has to be moving. So when do I use that equation? And when do I use the ##E^2## one?

Thanks for any help! :)
I would use each of the equations when it appears useful. For example, if I knew the mass and gamma factor of a particle and wanted the energy, I would use the first equation.

If I knew the mass and the momentum, I would use the second.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Dale
The drawback to using E = \sqrt{p^2 c^2 + m^2 c^4} is that it's harder to connect it with the velocity. That extra information is provided by:

v = \frac{pc^2}{E}

That's valid whether the object is massless or not. Another relation that gives the same answer, but is interesting because it is true both classically and relativistically, is:

v = \frac{dE}{dp}
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
806
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
6K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K