Kinetic Energy & Speed in Inertial Frames: Chris, Bob & Angelica

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the relativistic kinetic energy (Ek) calculations of three observers: Chris, Bob, and Angelica, each with a mass of 1. The participants utilized the formula w = (u+v)/(1+(u*v)/(c²) to determine relative speeds and kinetic energies. It was established that the kinetic energy of Angelica, viewed from Chris' perspective, is greater than that of Bob, despite both having the same speed from Bob's perspective. The non-linear relationship between velocity and kinetic energy in relativistic physics was emphasized, explaining why changes in kinetic energy differ even with identical changes in velocity.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of special relativity concepts
  • Familiarity with kinetic energy calculations
  • Knowledge of relativistic speed addition
  • Basic grasp of the speed of light as a constant (c)
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the relativistic kinetic energy formula: Ek = (γ - 1)mc²
  • Learn about the Lorentz transformation equations
  • Explore the implications of relativistic speeds on mass and energy
  • Investigate the graphical representation of kinetic energy vs. velocity
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, educators, and anyone interested in understanding the principles of special relativity and kinetic energy calculations in high-speed scenarios.

Wout Veltman
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
From Chris' perspective Bob is traveling with 1.5*108 m/s in direction a. Angelica is also traveling with 2.4*108 m/s in direction a.

From Bob's perspective Chris is traveling with 1.5*108 m/s in direction b (The opposite of x). Angelica is traveling with 1.5*108 m/s in direction a.

They all have a mass of 1

I am pretty sure these numbers are right. I used w = (u+v)/(1+(u*v)/(c2)) To calculate the relative speeds.
I used the calculation in the picture to calculate the Ek of Bob. I also calculated the Ek of Angelica, all from chris' perspective. Now the outcome that I was expecting was that Bob's Ek would be half of Angelica's Ek when looking from Chris' perspective. Because Angelica is also traveling with 1.5*108 m/s when measured from Bob's perspective. Why does this not count up?

I am sorry if a skipped a few vital steps. All of my special relativity knowledge comes from self-studying. We don't get this in school.

Thank you in advance.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Wout Veltman said:
Now the outcome that I was expecting was that Bob's Ek would be half of Angelica's Ek when looking from Chris' perspective
Why would that be true? Even in the non relativistic domain, it makes no sense.
Suppose you have an observer ##C## at the origin. An object ##B## moves with velocity ##v## in a particular direction. In the same direction, another object ##A## moves with velocity ##v## as seen by ##B##. The velocity of ##A## as seen by ##C## will be ##2v## ( since this is non relativistic, they simply add). The kinetic energy ( as observed by ##C##), of ##A## is not twice that of ##B##, rather it's four times .
Likewise, in the relativistic domain, there is no reason for the results you expected.
 
Last edited:
I see I made a few unnecessary mistakes there, also in the picture I posted with it. But my confusion is still there, let me try to explain it in another way.

You have an observer ##C## at the origin. An object ##B## is moving with 1.5*108 m/s in a particular direction. Object ##B## has his buddy ##A## moving next to him, with the same velocity and direction as ##B##. Now object ##A## accelerates till he reaches a speed of 1.5*108 m/s, when looking from ##B##'s point of view, and a speed of 2.4*108 m/s viewed from the observers point of view.

The Ek of ##B## viewed from ##C##'s point of view = 1,392*1016 J.
The Ek of ##A## viewed from ##C##'s point of view = 6,00*1016 J.
The Ek of ##A## viewed from ##B##'s point of view = 1,392*1016 J.

Now from ##C##'s point of view, ##A## gained 4,606*1016 J.
And from ##B## point of view, ##A## only gained 1,392*1016 J.

Now my question is, how do you explain this?I used 3*108 m/s as the speed of light to make things easier.
0ef9f8c42e.jpg
 
Is your doubt something like this : The change in velocity for both A and B is the same, yet the change in their kinetic energies are different. How?
If so, the answer is simple. The slope of the curve in ##K## vs ##v## graph is not a straight line. It keeps on increasing (the curve has an asymptote at ##v=c##). It means that as the value of ##v## increases, so does the slope. It means for a given ##\Delta v## , ##\Delta K## is greater for larger values of ##v##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Wout Veltman
The same thing is seen in non relativistic domain also. The change in kinetic energy of a body going from ##100 m/s## to ##101 m/s## is greater than the change in ##K## for a body going from ##0 m/s## to ##1m/s##.
The reason is same here. The slope ##(\Delta K)/(\Delta v)## is not a straight line.
 
Aniruddha@94 said:
Is your doubt something like this : The change in velocity for both A and B is the same, yet the change in their kinetic energies are different. How?
If so, the answer is simple. The slope of the curve in ##K## vs ##v## graph is not a straight line. It keeps on increasing (the curve has an asymptote at ##v=c##). It means that as the value of ##v## increases, so does the slope. It means for a given ##\Delta v## , ##\Delta K## is greater for larger values of ##v##.

That does come very close to what I ment, yes, thank you very much.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 123 ·
5
Replies
123
Views
10K
  • · Replies 66 ·
3
Replies
66
Views
5K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 87 ·
3
Replies
87
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K