Special Relativity: Finding Particle Speed

AI Thread Summary
A user is attempting to solve a special relativity problem involving a particle traveling 23,000 light years in 30 years from its own frame of reference. They initially struggled with time dilation and length contraction equations, leading to confusion with multiple unknowns. After several iterations, they realized their calculations consistently suggested the particle's speed approaches the speed of light, c, which they suspect is incorrect. Suggestions from other users included using rapidities and trigonometric approaches to clarify the relationship between distance, time, and velocity. Ultimately, the discussion emphasizes the need for careful handling of approximations and the importance of precise calculations in relativistic contexts.
Geoff
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Hello.
I am doing a special relativity question.
I got a particle traveling at some speed v. It travels 20000 light years from reference of galaxy in 30 years from the reference of the particle.
I need to find the speed of the particle.
Well, i tried to use time dilation and length contraction formulas but i end up with 3 unknown and 2 equations.
So after thinking a little more i made up another equation:
30 years=Dialated length/velocity.
Of course the units were correct years into seconds and so on.
Then i bassicle get 2 v's, one inside the gamme and the other one on the bottom of the fraction, but the answer i get is C. So i made a mistake somewhere...any ideas?
Thx
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Can you show some details of your work?
If you can think trigonometrically (using rapidities), the answer and its method of solution should become obvious.
 
Geoff said:
So after thinking a little more i made up another equation:
30 years=Dialated length/velocity.
Nothing wrong with this approach. Can't tell where your mistake was unless you show more details. (I assume by "dilated length" you actually mean contracted length: the galactic distance traveled as measured in the particle frame.)
 
well here is what i got:
Let say that time taken to go the distance in the frame of reference of a particle is T. and it is in seconds.
The contracted distance is not known to us but we do know that proper distance is D in meters.
Then we have
T=(D/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2))/v
then:
vT=D/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
so we square it all
we got
v^2*T^2=d^2 - d^2*c^2/v^2
now...
we need to solve for v, but to do that i will need to use power of 4...and i think that that is a good indicator that i am wrong...if anyone seeas a mistake in above logic please tell me other i will solve it out...but that seems about right that i do have a mistake in there.
 
scratch my last response i made a mistake in there, but i am stil getting c...
here is how
assume t being time, and d being proper distance.
t=d*gamma/v
t^2v^2=d^2*(1-v^2/c^2)
t^2v^2+d^2v^2/c^2=d^2
v^2(t^2+d^2/c^2)=d^2
now since t^2 is so much smaller then d^2/c^2 it is insignificant
then when u solve u get c for the speed.
I think i might have messed something up
note that t is the time from the perpective of the partice, d is the distance from the inertial reference,and i need to know velocity of the particle.
Any ideas where i made a mistake?
note that proper distance is 23 000 light years and relative time is 30 years, that is why it is insignificant and does nothing
 
well, Tv = d/gamma would lead to T^2 v^2 = d^2 ( 1 - v^2 / c^2) ...

you're deleting the only epsilon that distinguishes its speed from c.
(yea, it is really fast, apparently, but not quite that fast!)
just keep a few more digits.
 
well sig figs will not affect it at all, i mean the diffrence between the 2 values is something like 10 ^10...there is no way to keep sig figs there...u sure that that is correct?
Basicly here is the initial problem, maybe i interpreted it incorrecly?
a particle travels 23 000 light years proper distance in 30 years from the particles frame of reference.
i need to find it;s speed, when i did as i said above it gives me practically almost c, without any use for sig figs since they are at a 10 ^10 off the mark...
 
closer to 10^6 . write v/c = d(1-e)
 
how did u get that v/c equation? and what is e?
sry for my stupid question:(
 
  • #10
that was a suggestion for you to try ... e , epsilon? is 0 << e << 1 ,
so you can expand sqrt(1-e) = 1 - e/2 , that sort of thing . yours is tc/d .
 
  • #11
how did u get there exectly?, because i don;t see how u can isolate v/c by itself...
i mean the sqrt(1-e) = 1 - e/2 that is an estimate right?
and why do u say e=tc/d should it not be v^2/c^2?
 
Last edited:
  • #12
Here's how I'd do it:
L_0 / \gamma = v t

Rewrite in terms of \beta = v/c:
(L_0/c) \sqrt{(1 - \beta^2)} = \beta t
or:
(L_0/(ct)) \sqrt{(1 - \beta^2)} = (\beta)

Square:
(L_0/(ct))^2 (1 - \beta^2) = \beta^2

Now just solve for \beta, saving your approximations for the last step.
 
  • #13
Here's my trig/rapidity solution:
cT=c(proper time)="hypotenuse of a [Minkowski]-right triangle"
L=(distance between earth-at-rest and galaxy-at-rest in Earth frame)="opposite leg"=cT*sinh(rapidity)=cT*\sinh(\theta)
\beta=\tanh(\theta)
So,
\beta=\tanh\left(\sinh^{-1}\left(\displaystyle\frac{L}{cT}\right)\right)
[add]
Spacetime Trigonometry:
\beta=\tanh(\theta)
\gamma=\cosh(\theta)
\beta\gamma=\sinh(\theta)
Quiz: what is the interpretation of \exp(\theta)?
[/add]
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top