Special case of relativistic velocity addition law

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the relativistic velocity addition law, specifically the equation $$w =\frac{2\cdot v}{1+\frac{v^{2}}{c^{2}}}$$, where $$w$$ is the observed velocity and $$v$$ is the velocity in a reference frame. The confusion arises from the quadratic nature of the solution for $$v$$, represented as $$v_{1,2} =\frac{c^{2}\pm\sqrt{c^{4}-v^{2}\cdot c^{2}}}{2\cdot v}$$, leading to two roots, one of which is physically meaningless. The correct interpretation emphasizes that only one root holds physical significance, aligning with the condition $$0 < v < w$$.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of relativistic physics concepts
  • Familiarity with the Lorentz factor and its implications
  • Basic algebraic manipulation of equations
  • Knowledge of the speed of light constant, $$c$$
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Lorentz transformation equations
  • Learn about the implications of the Lorentz factor in relativistic scenarios
  • Explore examples of relativistic velocity addition in practical applications
  • Investigate the concept of spurious solutions in physics equations
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for physicists, students of relativity, and anyone interested in the mathematical foundations of relativistic motion and velocity addition.

IgorIGP
Messages
52
Reaction score
2
TL;DR
How can I express v(w) from $$w =\frac{2\cdot v}{1+\frac{v^{2}}{c^{2}}}$$
- special case of relativistic velocity addition law (where v1=v2=v)?
Hi gentlemen. My model is simple. Imagine, I watch a body which approaches me with velocity of w which value I can measure . I know that this a body has velocity v in a some reference system which aproaches me with same velocity of v. This velocity needs to be calculated (I can not mesure it).
So when I know v the value of w can be expressed as
$$w =\frac{2\cdot v}{1+\frac{v^{2}}{c^{2}}}$$
and when I do not know v but know w I should resolve the reverse task and... As I can see there is not a complicated quadratic equation, but I am confused by the ambiguity of the solution-2 roots, and the relative bulkiness of the expressions for these roots. That looks like
$$v_{1,2} =\frac{c^{2}\pm\sqrt{c^{4}-v^{2}\cdot c^{2}}}{v}$$
May be I made something (or everything) wrong? When it is a right formula what means the fact of two roots?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't get the 2 in the denominator, but otherwise it looks right. I suspect that if you check (edit: feed your solution for ##v## into your expression for ##w## - do you get ##w##?) and correct that, you'll find that one of the solutions exceeds light speed for all ##w##. That's a valid solution to the maths, but not physically meaningful - usually called a "spurious solution".

A trivial example: I have a square of area 4 - what's it's side length? The answer is ##\sqrt 4=\pm 2##. We discard the negative solution as physically meaningless. The same is happening in your question.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Dale and IgorIGP
IgorIGP said:
Summary: How can I express v(w) from $$w =\frac{2\cdot v}{1+\frac{v^{2}}{c^{2}}}$$
- special case of relativistic velocity addition law (where v1=v2=v)?

Hi gentlemen. My model is simple. Imagine, I watch a body which approaches me with velocity of w which value I can measure . I know that this a body has velocity v in a some reference system which approach me with same velocity of v. This velocity needs to be calculated (I can not mesure it).
So when I know v the value of w can be expressed as
$$w =\frac{2\cdot v}{1+\frac{v^{2}}{c^{2}}}$$
and when I do not know v but know w I should resolve the reverse task and... As I can see there is not a complicated quadratic equation, but I am confused by the ambiguity of the solution-2 roots, and the relative bulkiness of the expressions for these roots. That looks like
$$v_{1,2} =\frac{c^{2}\pm\sqrt{c^{4}-v^{2}\cdot c^{2}}}{2\cdot v}$$
May be I made something (or everything) wrong? When it is a right formula what means the fact of two roots?

The ##2v## on the denominator is wrong. Apart from that the formula looks correct. Only one solution is valid, though.

PS You seem to have swapped the meaning of ##v## and ##w## at some point. Assuming ##w## is the initial velocity and ##v## is the relativistic half of that, then you should get:

##v = \frac{c^2}{w}(1- \frac{1}{\gamma_w})##

Or, with a bit more algebra:

##v= c \sqrt{\frac{\gamma_w -1}{\gamma_w + 1}}##
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: IgorIGP
Thank you very much gentlemen! I am sorry of my error. After reducing the fraction I've typed numerator in a reduced edition and the denominater remains in an old one. Thanks I've corrected the mistake with pleasure.
So you think the one root has physical meaning only?
 
IgorIGP said:
Thank you very much gentlemen! I am sorry of my error. After reducing the fraction I've typed numerator in a reduced edition and the denominater remains in an old one. Thanks I've corrected the mistake with pleasure.
So you think the one root has physical meaning only?

Yes. You set the problem up assuming ##0 < v < w##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: IgorIGP
That were great answers, thak you very much!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K