The Energy-momentum formula considering internal energy

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the energy-momentum relation in the context of a mass with internal energy, particularly how this affects the total energy and momentum of the system. Participants explore the implications of adding internal energy, such as heat or pressure, to a moving mass and whether the established energy-momentum formula still holds under these conditions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the energy-momentum relation remains valid even when internal energy is considered, suggesting that internal energy contributes to the total energy and momentum.
  • Others question whether contributions to rest mass are additive, proposing that internal energy could alter the effective mass of the system.
  • A participant proposes that if a mass with internal energy is moving, its total energy could be interpreted as double the rest mass energy, leading to confusion about the invariant mass.
  • Concerns are raised regarding the clarity of adding internal energy to a moving system, with some arguing that this process inherently involves changes in momentum as well.
  • Participants discuss the implications of different frames of reference, particularly how the energy and momentum of a system may appear differently depending on the observer's motion.
  • There is a suggestion that Einstein's original proof regarding energy-mass equivalence may not apply to systems with internal structure, prompting further exploration of this claim.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the treatment of internal energy and its effects on mass and momentum. There is no consensus on whether internal energy can be simply added to the rest mass or how it affects the overall energy-momentum relationship.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the need for careful definitions of terms like "internal energy" and "rest mass," indicating that misunderstandings may arise from ambiguous language. The discussion also reflects varying interpretations of relativistic mass and its relevance in modern physics.

  • #31
Sunfire said:
If we have 2 relativistic masses moving with the same velocity but having different momenta; Once brought to rest, if it turns out that they both end up as identical rest masses

This is not possible. If they have the same velocity but different momenta, they must have different rest masses.

Sunfire said:
I wanted to understand what is the role of internal energy in relativistic mass and momentum.

As has already been said several times in this thread, internal energy is part of rest mass. So it plays the same role as anything else that is part of rest mass.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Then how about this simple example -

Gas with rest mass ##m_0## is at rest in a stationary frame.
The gas is pressurized, adding internal energy ##m_0c^2##
The total energy becomes ##2m_0c^2##, the rest mass is ##2m_0## (##m_0## comes from its actual mass, the other ##m_0## comes from adding internal energy), the 3-momentum is zero.
This same gas moving with velocity ##v## means its total energy now is ##mc^2=\gamma \times \mbox{the rest energy of the gas} \times c^2=2\gamma m_0c^2##; the 3-momentum is ##2\gamma m_0\mathbf{v}##, the 4-momentum is ##(2\gamma m_0 c, 2 \gamma m_0 \mathbf{v})##.

Correct?
 
  • #34
PeterDonis said:
I think the OP needs to clarify exactly what physical process he is thinking of.
I think that specifying the exact physical process is certainly sufficient, but I think it is not necessary. Many different physical processes could result in the same changes.

pervect said:
What frame is the "internal energy" being added in? Adding energy in one frame may add both energy and momentum in another frame.
I think this is the key. What is added is not energy, it is four-momentum. The change in four-momentum must be specified, e.g. By specifying the frame where only energy is added.

For example, in my analysis above I assumed that only energy was added in the frame where the gas was moving at v. This could be accomplished by having it absorb a pair of opposed light pulses orthogonal to the motion. The result of that is a change in energy and not momentum.

However, even though momentum is not changing, the speed is. In the gas' frame the pulses are not orthogonal due to aberration. If you want to maintain speed then the energy must be added in the gas' frame, which will result in a change of momentum in the other frame.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 82 ·
3
Replies
82
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
6K
  • · Replies 131 ·
5
Replies
131
Views
12K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K