I Second Derivative of Time Dilation Equation

Eismcsquared
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hello all.
I was playing around with the time dilation equation : √(1-v2/c2)
Specifically, I decided to take the derivative(d/dv) of the equation. Following the rules of calculus, as little of them as I know, I got this:
d/dv(√(1-v2/c2) = v / (c2√(1-v2/c2)).
Now, this seems reasonable enough, and when I (don’t hate me for this) plugged in our original equation into Desmos, and asked for the derivative as well, my equation seemed to be correct.
However, every time I attempt to produce the second derivative of the equation, I end up with an output of simply -1. Naturally this is wrong, and desmos agrees.
Here’s my work:
-v • d/dv(1/√(1-v2/c2))•d/dv(-v)•1/√(1-v2/c2)
Continuing...
-v•1/(-v / c2√(1-v2/c2))
• 1/c2√(1-b2/c2) • -1
Simplifying...
-v•c2√(1-v2/c2)/(-v)
• -1/(c2√(1-v2/c2)
Simplifying some more, i get -1??
I have no clue where I’m going wrong.. I think it’s simply a matter of me not quite understanding one the calculus rules I used in this.
I’m sorry for any formatting errors/messiness but I’ll try to clean it up as best I can. I can’t seem to find the fraction button.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Eismcsquared said:
I got this

Note that you left out the minus sign in front here. You put it in in your work further down, but I wanted to note that it's left out here.

Eismcsquared said:
Here’s my work

You're using the chain rule, which is fine. I would advise using units where ##c = 1##, which will reduce clutter and make it easier to do the math. That gives this for the first line of your work:

$$
\frac{d}{dv} \left ( - v \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - v^2}} \right) = \left( \frac{d}{dv} - v \right) \left( \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - v^2}} \right) - v \frac{d}{dv} \left( \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - v^2}} \right)
$$

However, I don't think you're performing the derivative of ##1 / \sqrt{1 - v^2}## correctly. It might help to rewrite it using explicitly exponents, so that it's easier to take derivatives using the power rule ##d (x^n) = n x^{n - 1}##. Rewriting the second term above this way, and evaluating the first term since it's simple, you should get this:

$$
- \left( 1 - v^2 \right)^{- 1/2} - v \frac{d}{dv} \left( 1 - v^2 \right)^{- 1/2}
$$

Does that help to see how to correctly take the derivative of the second term?
 
Yes, thank you!
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. The Relativator was sold by (as printed) Atomic Laboratories, Inc. 3086 Claremont Ave, Berkeley 5, California , which seems to be a division of Cenco Instruments (Central Scientific Company)... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/relativator-circular-slide-rule-simulated-with-desmos/ by @robphy
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
14
Views
5K
Replies
17
Views
4K
Back
Top