Time derivative of relativistic momentum

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
5 replies · 5K views
birulami
Messages
153
Reaction score
0
Did I understand correctly that relativistic momentum is

[tex]p(t) = m\cdot\gamma(t)\cdot v(t)[/tex],​

where [itex]\gamma = c/\sqrt{c^2-v^2}[/itex] and [itex]c[/itex] is the speed of light? For the fun of it I wrote down the time derivative and got

[tex]{d\over dt}p(t) = \gamma^3(t)\cdot a(t)[/tex]​

with [itex]a(t) = d v(t)/dt[/itex]. Yet I cannot find the funny exponent of 3 of a [itex]\gamma[/itex] anywhere in a book. Am I missing a trivial transformation of [itex]\gamma^3 a[/itex] into a better known form? Or is it that the time derivative of relativistic momentum is not an important concept, which is why I did not come across this formula before?

Additional question: is [itex]p[/itex] as define above is a conserved quantity?


Harald.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
No, the mass is constant. It's the relativistic mass (=[itex]\gamma m[/itex]) that isn't constant.

Birulami, your calculation is fine, and yes, the p you have defined is conserved. I don't know why you can't find it in a book. One possible reason is that it's often convenient to talk about rapidity instead of velocity when you're describing the motion of an accelerating particle. E.g. in post #15 in this thread, the ^3 appears on a hyperbolic function (eq. 12).

You may also find the calculation I did in #15 in this thread interesting.
 
Last edited:
You're right, I plead temporary brain lapse. The mass is constant. [tex]\gamma[/tex] ensures that m is the rest mass.
 
[tex]\frac{d\bf p}{dt}= m\frac{d}{dt}\left[\frac{\bf v}<br /> {\sqrt{1-{\bf v}^2}}\right]<br /> = m[\gamma{\bf a}+\gamma^3{\bf v(v\cdot a)}]<br /> =m\gamma^3[{\bf a}+{\bf v\times(v\times a)}][/tex].
with c=1. Either final form is useful.
dp/dt is important, and is discussed in advanced texts.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Fredrik said:
You may also find the calculation I did in #15 in this thread interesting.

Indeed. I'll take a closer look. Thanks,
Harald.