I Understanding 4-Momentum in Special Relativity

nikolafmf
Messages
112
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I am studing elementary particle physics and want to ask something, just to check if I have understood properly. So, as I understand, this is true about four-momentum in special relativity:

1. The square of the sum of particles' four momenta is invariant under Lorentz transformations.
2. The four momentum is NOT invariant under Lorentz transformations.
3. The four momentum is conserved.

This seems to be extremely usefull in particle physics. I hope the statements are true. Are they? What about proving them? Where can I find proofs?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
nikolafmf said:
1. The square of the sum of particles' four momenta is invariant under Lorentz transformations.

I assume that what you mean by this is: take the sum of the 4-momenta of the particles going into an interaction, and take the squared norm of the resulting 4-vector; take the sum of the 4-momenta of the particles coming out of the same interaction, and take the squared norm of that resulting 4-vector; the two results will be the same. Yes, this is true.

nikolafmf said:
2. The four momentum is NOT invariant under Lorentz transformations.

The four-momentum of what?

nikolafmf said:
3. The four momentum is conserved.

The four-momentum of what?
 
"I assume that what you mean by this is: take the sum of the 4-momenta of the particles going into an interaction, and take the squared norm of the resulting 4-vector; take the sum of the 4-momenta of the particles coming out of the same interaction, and take the squared norm of that resulting 4-vector; the two results will be the same. Yes, this is true."

That would mean conserved, not invariant. A textbook made me cautious to make diference between the two. So, I mean this: take the sum of the 4-momenta of the particles going into an interaction, and take the squared norm of the resulting 4-vector; then do the same for the same particles in DIFFERENT coordinate system, into which we go by some Lorentz transformation. You must get the same number?

For the third and the second question, I meant the same as the first, the sum of the four momenta of isolated system of particles. Not the square of the sum, but just the sum. It should be not invariant, but should be conserved, right?
 
nikolafmf said:
That would mean conserved, not invariant.

Yes, fair point.

nikolafmf said:
I mean this: take the sum of the 4-momenta of the particles going into an interaction, and take the squared norm of the resulting 4-vector; then do the same for the same particles in DIFFERENT coordinate system, into which we go by some Lorentz transformation. You must get the same number?

Yes. The squared norm of any 4-vector is a Lorentz scalar and is therefore invariant.

nikolafmf said:
For the third and the second question, I meant the same as the first, the sum of the four momenta of isolated system of particles. Not the square of the sum, but just the sum.

The sum is a 4-vector, not a scalar. The usual terminology for 4-vectors, 4-tensors, etc. is "covariant", not "invariant", meaning that their components transform according to the appropriate laws ("4-vector", "4-tensor" etc. are really terms that denote transformation laws). So the sum of the 4-momenta of all the particles going into an interaction will be covariant, since it's a 4-vector.

The sum of 4-momenta of all the particles going in will be the same as the sum of 4-momenta of all the particles coming out--that is, you will get the same 4-vector in both cases. (This assumes an isolated interaction with no other forces, no external potentials, etc.) So the sum will be conserved.
 
OK, thank you very much.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
33
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
726
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
49
Views
5K
Back
Top