Relativistic velocity derivation under constant force

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion focuses on deriving the relativistic velocity equation for an object under constant force, specifically using the equation \(\frac{Fct}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^{2}}{c^{2}}}}\). The user initially attempted a derivation using \(F=ma\) but encountered errors, particularly in integrating the mass term that includes relativistic effects. The correct approach involves using the momentum relation \(\vec{F}=\frac{d\,\vec{p}}{d\,t}\) and substituting \(\vec{p}=m\,\gamma\,\vec{v}\) to derive the velocity correctly. Additional resources were provided for further understanding of constant acceleration in relativistic contexts.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Newton's second law (\(F=ma\))
  • Familiarity with relativistic mass and the Lorentz factor (\(\gamma=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}}\))
  • Basic knowledge of calculus, particularly integration techniques
  • Concept of momentum in physics (\(\vec{p}=m\,\gamma\,\vec{v}\))
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of relativistic velocity from force using the momentum equation
  • Explore the implications of constant force in relativistic contexts through resources like the Baez equations
  • Learn about the relationship between coordinate and proper acceleration in relativistic motion
  • Investigate the mathematical treatment of constant acceleration in special relativity, referencing the provided links
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, engineering students, and anyone interested in the applications of relativistic mechanics, particularly in contexts involving constant forces and acceleration.

cbriggs
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I've been attempting to derive the relativistic velocity equation (for an object accelerating with a constant force- \frac{Fct}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^{2}}{c^{2}}}}) for near a month without any solution.

I've derived an equation form the F=ma relation which includes a Sin function, so I know it's wrong. However, I haven't been able to determine why. Could someone point me in the right direction?

My derivation:

Using a=\frac{F}{m} and a\equiv\frac{dv}{dt}

\frac{dv}{dt}=\frac{F}{m}

m dv= F dt where m\equiv\frac{m_{o}}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^{2}}{c^{2}}}}


\frac{m_{o} dv}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^{2}}{c^{2}}}}= F dt

Integrate both sides

m_{o}c Sin^{-1}(\frac{v}{c})=Ft + constant

Which gives an answer that doesn't make sense and obviously doesn't represent v(t)

\frac{v}{c}=Sin(\frac{Ft + const}{m_{o}c})

Any idea where the error is, or how to get the correct expression? Any help is appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
cbriggs said:
...My derivation:

Using a=\frac{F}{m} and a\equiv\frac{dv}{dt} here is the mistake

\frac{dv}{dt}=\frac{F}{m}

m dv= F dt where m\equiv\frac{m_{o}}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^{2}}{c^{2}}}}


\frac{m_{o} dv}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^{2}}{c^{2}}}}= F dt

...

You have to write

\vec{F}=\frac{d\,\vec{p}}{d\,t},\quad \vec{p}=m\,\gamma\,\vec{v}, \quad \gamma=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}}

Thus first integrate

\vec{F}=\frac{d\,\vec{p}}{d\,t}\Rightarrow \vec{p}}=\vec{F}\,t+\vec{p}_o

plug in \vec{p}=m\,\gamma\,\vec{v} and solve for the velocity.
 
Rainbow Child said:
\vec{F}=\frac{d\,\vec{p}}{d\,t}\Rightarrow \vec{p}}=\vec{F}\,t+\vec{p}_o

plug in \vec{p}=m\,\gamma\,\vec{v} and solve for the velocity.

I assume you are talking coordinate values here, not "proper values", meaning the constant force will produce decreasing coordinate acceleration with time.

Question: will such a constant (coordinate) force produce a constant proper acceleration, i.e., as measured by an accelerometer on board the spacecraft ?
 
Last edited:
I assume you are talking coordinate values here, not "proper values", meaning the coordinate acceleration will decrease with time.

I don't really understand the terminology here! It is not you by my English! :smile:

The constant force \vec{F} I mean is like the spacecraft is like a charge accelerating in a constant electrical field. Is that what you mean by constant coordinate force?
 
Wow... Thanks much, RC. I'm still not sure where my original math went wrong, but I'm okay with pondering that until I get the answer. My urgent task was to know how to derive the equation, which you have generously provided.

Jorrie- Yes: this applies to accelerating charges in a constant electric field (very good guess RC- you're on fire tonight), so no proper measurements required.

Regards to all,
Carey
 
Newton's 2nd law must be written in the form

\vec{F}=\frac{d\,\vec{p}}{d\,t}\Rightarrow \vec{F}=\gamma\,m\,\vec{a}+\gamma^3\,m\,\frac{\vec{v}\cdot\vec{a}}{c^2}\,\vec{v}

for the spatial compontets of the four-force.

But this is a horrible point to start! :smile:
 
This link gives the equations of a rocket with constant acceleration (as felt by the occupants of the rocket)

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/rocket.html

It does not show the derivations but it gives you something to cross check your answers against.

This link gives a derivation of velocity from force. I’m not sure if the derivation is correct but the final answer agrees with the equations given by Baez.

http://www.usna.edu/Users/physics/mungan/Scholarship/ConstantAcceleration.pdf

The author makes the observation “The fact that the passengers feel one gee means that the force F measured in frame R is mg. However, as proved by French Eq. (7-20), an observer in frame E measures the same (longitudinal) force, despite the fact that she measures neither the same (relativistic) mass nor acceleration of the rocket. “ which simplifies things a bit.

Substituting F/m for a in the Baez equations(where m is the proper mass) and dividing by c we get:

\frac{v}{c}= \frac{1}{\sqrt{1+(m c)^2/(Ft)^2}}

and

\frac{v}{c}= tanh\left(\frac{F T}{m c}\right)

The last equation is in terms of the proper time and becomes:

\frac{v}{c}= tanh\left( sinh^{-1}\left(\frac{F t}{m c}\right)\right) in terms of coordinate time.

I hope that helps.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
950
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
6K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K