?Understanding Special Relativity: Speed Addition & Subtraction

thecosmos123456
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
special relativity says speed can be additive and subtractive ,our motion influences the speed , i did not get this part .how can our motion influence the speed of other object ?and how can speed be additive and subtractive
 
Physics news on Phys.org
thecosmos123456 said:
special relativity says speed can be additive and subtractive

What do you mean by this? It's not clear what your question is.
 
The only thing I can think of, as the question isn't very clear. Is how you measure the speed of an object is influenced by the speed of the observer. Ie if your on a train moving east at 100 km per hour and look at a car moving at the same speed and direction. The car will appear to not be moving.

So the speed is additive and subtractive compared to your momentum and direction.
The speed of the object itself isn't influenced but how you measure the speed relative to your motion is influenced.

However that's just a guess, if your dealing with relativistic apparent velocity then it gets more complicated.

Your going to need to clarify your question
 
Last edited:
You still haven't said what you mean by "speed can be additive and subtractive, our motion influences speed", but you seem to have got it exactly backwards.

If you mean by that that we can only observe or measure speeds of other objects relative to our own, that goes back to Galileo (and what is called "Gallilean relativity" as opposed to "Einsteinian relativity"). Gallileo said that if A observes B moving at velocity v (i.e B's velocity relative to A) and B observes C moving at velocity u (i.e C's velocity relative to B) then A will observe C moving at velocity v+ u (i.e. C's velocity relative to A).

In special relativity, while those speeds will change with respect to change of reference, they are not "additive". In the scenario above, A will observe C's velocity (C's velocity relative to A) to be \frac{u+ v}{1+ \frac{uv}{c^2}}
 
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...
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...
Back
Top