Relativistic Energy in an Inverse Square Field: The Impact of Velocity

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relativistic energy of a particle in an inverse square field, particularly focusing on how velocity affects energy as it approaches relativistic speeds. Participants explore the relationship between kinetic energy, the Lorentz factor (gamma), and the potential energy associated with the inverse square law.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that if the force is proportional to 1/r², then the energy of the particle remains proportional to 1/r, even under relativistic conditions.
  • One participant references the kinetic energy equation from Wikipedia, suggesting that gamma can be expressed as a function of kinetic energy and position, specifically gamma = KE + 1 = 1/r + 1.
  • Another participant challenges the idea that gamma is a function of position, questioning the derivation of gamma in relation to the inverse square field.
  • There is a proposal that if gamma equals 1 at infinity, then kinetic energy must also approach zero at that limit, leading to the conclusion that gamma can be expressed as a function of position with a constant of proportionality included.
  • A participant introduces the concept of gravitational time dilation, questioning its relationship to the time dilation experienced by a particle falling from infinity, while another participant expresses uncertainty regarding this concept.
  • One participant notes that the description of gravity using a 1/r potential may not be valid in a relativistic context.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between gamma and position, with some supporting the idea that gamma can be expressed in terms of kinetic energy and distance, while others contest this notion. The discussion on gravitational time dilation also reveals uncertainty and differing interpretations among participants.

Contextual Notes

There are assumptions regarding the constancy of rest mass and the strength of the force, as well as the implications of using the 1/r potential in a relativistic framework that remain unresolved.

granpa
Messages
2,268
Reaction score
7
for an inverse square field the force is proportional to 1/r^2

obviously we integrate over distance to get energy ≡ 1/r (where energy = 0 at infinity)

but what happens when velocity becomes relativistic?
is relativistic energy proportional to 1/r?if its any easier what I am really looking for is gamma as a function of r for an inverse square field and gamma = 1 at infinity
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, if the force is proportional to 1/r^2, then the energy of the particle is proportional to 1/r. (Even in relativity).
 
wikipedia says that

KE = m0(gamma - 1)

so

gamma = KE + 1 = 1/r + 1
 
granpa said:
gamma = KE + 1 = 1/r + 1
Huh? How did you get this? Gamma is not a function of position.
 
its for an inverse square field where gamma = 1 at infinity

I'm assuming that KE = 1/r
 
granpa said:
wikipedia says that

KE = m0(gamma - 1)

so

gamma = KE + 1 = 1/r + 1

Wikipedia are using the convention of setting c=1. If you want to include c, then the equation is:
KE = m_0c^2(\gamma - 1)
So then you'd get:
\gamma = \frac{KE}{m_0c^2} + 1
And if we say gamma=1 when r=infinity, then KE=0 at r=infinity.
We know 1/r gives the change in energy of the particle. And assuming the rest mass of the particle doesn't change, then 1/r is proportional to the KE.

So then we have
\gamma = \alpha \frac{1}{r} + 1
Where I've left in the alpha as a constant of proportionality, since there is the rest mass, strength of the force and the speed of light which are all constants that must be taken in.
(So yes, I agree, as long as the constants are kept in, which also provide the correct dimensions)
 
granpa said:
I'm assuming that KE = 1/r
Oh, ok.
 
I've been told that the gravitational time dilation at any point in a gravitational field is equal to the time dilation that a particle falling from infinity to that point would experience due to its velocity alone.

Is that right?
 
I'm not sure, since I don't know much about general relativity.

According to wikipedia, the gravitational time dilation of an object at rest in the vicinity of a non-rotating massive spherically-symmetric object is:
\frac{1}{1-\frac{r_0}{r}}
Where r0 is the Schwarzschild radius of the massive object.
 
  • #10
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/gratim.html

gtim1.gif


where T is the time interval measured by a clock far away from the mass

since
gtim4.gif


gtim5.gif
 
Last edited:
  • #11
granpa said:
I've been told that the gravitational time dilation at any point in a gravitational field is equal to the time dilation that a particle falling from infinity to that point would experience due to its velocity alone.

Is that right?

Note that, if you want to talk about gravity in a relativistic manner, the 1/r potential is no longer a correct description.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
2K