What Are the Challenges of Force in Special Relativity?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter sadraj
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Force
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the challenges of applying Newtonian concepts of force within the framework of special relativity (SR). Participants explore the implications of SR on classical mechanics, particularly focusing on the limitations of Newton's second law and the role of force in relativistic contexts. The conversation touches on theoretical aspects, conceptual clarifications, and the potential advantages of Lagrangian mechanics in solving relativistic problems.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that SR primarily deals with inertial frames where Newton's first law is valid, complicating the application of Newton's second law in accelerating frames.
  • Others argue that the limitation on the speed of information propagation in SR necessitates changes to classical mechanics principles, particularly regarding simultaneity and the third law of Newton.
  • One participant notes that in SR, force may depend on more than just position and velocity, as simultaneity is frame-dependent, complicating predictions of motion.
  • Another contribution states that force in SR is modified by the relationship F=dp/dt, where momentum is frame-dependent, yet it remains a second-order differential equation in position.
  • Some participants express that the Lagrangian formulation of mechanics, which does not rely on forces explicitly, may be more suitable for relativistic problems due to its focus on energy and symmetry.
  • There is a suggestion that while forces are less central in advanced physics, they can still be framed within relativistic contexts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the best approach to understanding force in special relativity, with multiple competing views on the implications of SR for classical mechanics and the utility of different formulations of mechanics.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on definitions of force and momentum, the unresolved nature of how to effectively apply Newtonian principles in relativistic contexts, and the varying interpretations of simultaneity in different frames.

sadraj
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
Hello

When I had relativity course and I read some books and sources like : Rindler W. Relativity.. special, general, and cosmological (2ed., OUP, 2006)
I found that in these texts authors talk about Newton second law and explain why this law is not Lorentz invarient , but never use this new form of second law in the problems. In example I couldn't find resolving two body problem in those texts.
Clearly I think there is a problem between special relativity and meaning of force which we find in Newton laws. What are these problems ?
Is Lagrangian form of mechanics more elegant when we solve relativistic problems?

Sorry for bad English!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi sadraj,
The problem might be that SR concerns itself primarily with inertial frames in which Newton's first law holds. For an accelerating object, its own rest frame features "inertial forces", or pseudoforces, that arise as a result of the fact that it itself is accelerating. For example, the coriolis force on Earth has a noticeable effect on things like battleship shells; they appear to experience a lateral force, but in fact the effect is an illusion caused by the Earth's rotation. When you want to address problems such as collisions in SR, the best way is to appeal to conservation of 4-momentum to talk about the initial and final outcomes, and assign all interactions that connect the two into a box marked "there be dragons".
Some people probably think lagrangian mechanics is more elegant full stop :-p The general idea is that everyone must agree on the path which has "least" action, as this dictates the physical motion of the system, so the action is expressed as proportional to the arc length of the path, which is an lorentz invariant quantity. It's a slightly mathsy way of looking at things (the most basic familiarity with the differential geometry of curves helps) but it is quite neat.
 
Thanks muppet but I couldn't understand you on :
The problem might be that SR concerns itself primarily with inertial frames in which Newton's first law holds.

I think the problem is related to limitation of information propagation's speed. I mean no signal can't travel faster than light.
This causes some problems in Newtonian mechanics principles & they should be changed. For example the meaning of time and simultaneity. Or third law of Newton that is based on simultaneity.
There is another problem. In Newtonian mechanics solving motion equation is equal to solving a second ordered diffrential equation(or some second ordered diffrential eqations less or equal to 3 !) So if you put initial (x,y,z) and initial velocity vector , you can predict what you want about particle at any time. But because of in SR simultaneity depends on frame and is not invarient so F (force) can be a function not just as [tex]\vec{}r[/tex] &
[tex]\vec{}v[/tex] but function of derivations of [tex]\vec{}a[/tex] . This means for predicting next times , initial informations that are needed are not just
[tex]\vec{}r_0[/tex] & [tex]\vec{}v_0[/tex]These facts show that in order to predict nature in high speed levels force is not such a useful tool.
 
Force in special relativity needs to be modified because (1) F=dp/dt and (2) momentum is a frame-dependent object. It is a function of the velocity and acceleration in a given Lorentz frame, so it's still a 2nd order differential equation in position. There isn't any more problem using force than momentum or energy in special relativity (one caveat is that you can't consider gravity as an external force; you have to go to general relativity).
Forces are generally not used often because, as you might have been thinking, the Lagrangian formulation of mechanics does not use forces explicitly like Newton's formulation does. Instead, it's based on energies and Euler-Lagrange equations of motion. This formulation of mechanics is more popular partly because symmetry is such an important concept in modern physics, and the Lagrangian formulation is well-suited for this. Also, quantum mechanics is based on an energy formulation (Hamiltonian mechanics) that is closely related to the Lagrangian formulation. While forces lose their central importance outside of introductory mechanics, you can still frame many results in terms of them.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
6K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K