Schutz First Course in GR Problem 15b, chapter 1. Mistake?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves the Lorentz contraction formula in the context of special relativity, specifically examining the relationship between the lengths measured by two observers moving relative to each other at velocities close to the speed of light.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the validity of the approximation given in the problem statement, with some suggesting it may contain a typo. There is an exploration of the definitions of the lengths measured in different frames of reference.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing examination of the problem's setup and the definitions of the variables involved. Some participants express doubt about the correctness of the approximation provided, while others offer insights into the implications of the Lorentz contraction effect.

Contextual Notes

Participants are considering the implications of the Lorentz contraction and how the definitions of the lengths in different frames may affect the interpretation of the problem. There is a mention of the potential for confusion regarding the notation used in the problem statement.

guitarphysics
Messages
241
Reaction score
7

Homework Statement


Suppose that the velocity of an observer O' relative to O is nearly that of light, |v|=1-ε, 0<ε<<1. Show that the Lorentz contraction formula can by approximated by:
∆x≈∆x'/√(2ε)

Homework Equations


Lorentz contraction, ∆x=∆x'/γ

The Attempt at a Solution


I think it should be ∆x≈∆x'(√(2ε)). (As opposed to divided by the square root of 2ε). Is this a mistake in the book, or am I just being stupid? Don't tell me how to solve it or anything- just if it's a mistake or not; if not, I'll keep trying but I don't want to waste my time if the problem is stated incorrectly. Thanks!Ps. Anybody who likes SR- try out problem 12 from that same chapter, it's very fun :).
PPs. Just thinking intuitively, the approximation given by the problem is incorrect because it'd give a longer length measured by observer O, which just makes no sense. The famous effect is a contraction, after all!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The length is maximum in the frame in which the object is at rest. Usually x' refers to the moving frame of reference. Imagine you stand on the ground and determine the length of a stick in a spaceship. The length of a stick is measured Lo by the astronaut, the observer who moves together with the stick: Δx' = Lo. You measure L=Δx, a shorter length, L=Lo√(1-(v/c2), but that means Δx'=Δx/√(1-(v/c)2).

ehild
 
I agree, and I don't believe I said anything that contradicted any of that. What are your thoughts on the problem? I think it has a typo, and it should say that ∆x is approximately ∆x' *times* sqrt(2 epsilon).
 
guitarphysics said:
I agree, and I don't believe I said anything that contradicted any of that. What are your thoughts on the problem? I think it has a typo, and it should say that ∆x is approximately ∆x' *times* sqrt(2 epsilon).

Yes, you are right if Lo=∆x' and L=∆x, as L should be shorter than Lo :) . It is a typo in the book, or it defined x' and x in the opposite way.

ehild
 
Cool, thanks!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
6K
Replies
5
Views
4K