Two Frames of 0-Momentum in the Minkowski Plane?

haruna
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Hello to everybody,

the question seems trivial in my mind, yet, is it legal to say that there is not unique frame of 0 total momentum in the Minkowski spacetime plane?

I am thinking of two non-accelerating equal masses on a horizontal plane, one is moving horizontally, the other perpendicularly as their respective 2-velocities in the Minkowski spacetime plane indicate. A quick way to find the frame of 0-momentum, one either moves along with the horizontal moving mass and Lorentz-transforms the velocity of the other mass, or does it by following the perpendicularly pointed mass.

These two separate methods yield two different results as to the direction of the respected 2-velocities of the masses in the Minkowski plane, very much unlike the Newtonian case where they're the same regardless.
So in this case, there must be two frames of 0-momentum. Is this legal to say, or they both cannot be told apart?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Unless the total energy is zero, there is a unique frame in which the total momentum is zero. Suppose that in one frame, the total momentum is in the x-direction. Then in another frame, the momentum in the x-direction will be given by:

p' = \gamma (p - v E/c^2)

where v is the relative speed between the two frames (assuming the velocity is in the x-direction), and where E is the total energy in the original frame and p is the momentum. That equation uniquely determines the value of v to make p'=0: v = p c^2/E.

If the momentum is not in the x-direction, you can first perform a Lorentz transformation to get the momentum zero in the x-direction, then perform a second transformation to get it zero in the y-direction, then a third to get it zero in the z-direction. The resulting frame is uniquely determined by the momentum and energy in the initial frame.
 
haruna: Both your methods are wrong.
Add the two momenta vectorially so P=p1+p2, and E=e1+e2.
Then Lorentz transform with v=-P/E.
 
Meir Achuz said:
haruna: Both your methods are wrong.
Add the two momenta vectorially so P=p1+p2, and E=e1+e2.
Then Lorentz transform with v=-P/E.

Yes, thank you both. I can see my mistake now, tho not for the reason you've just pointed out.

You see, when i move along one of the two masses bringing its speed to a standstill, I add the momenta vectorially by transferring the one component of momentum to the other moving mass.

My mistake was when I Lorentz-transformed with v=-P/E, I forgot to rotate the velocity 2 or (3-vectors in general case) to point both in the x-direction. I forgot to rotate the Minkowski plane in the direction θ of v where v=tanhθ, and was left with the same velocity directions as before the transformation.
 
haruna said:
My mistake was when I Lorentz-transformed with v=-P/E, I forgot to rotate the velocity 2 or (3-vectors in general case) to point both in the x-direction.

Oops. This is not right! The correct statement is: I forgot to rotate the velocity 3 or (4-vectors in the general case) to point both in the x-direction.
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
Back
Top