What is the relationship between 4-momentum and energy/momentum components?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Rudipoo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    4-momentum Components
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between 4-momentum and the energy and momentum components of a massive particle in the context of special relativity. Participants explore theoretical definitions, conservation laws, and implications of these concepts without reaching a consensus.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants define the 4-momentum as p=mu, where u is the 4-velocity, and express the components in a specific frame as [p]=gamma*(mc,mu).
  • One argument suggests that if 4-momentum is conserved, the first component being always positive indicates it represents total energy.
  • Another participant notes that the identification of the zeroth component with energy/c and the spatial component with 3-momentum is tied to common conventions and definitions in physics.
  • One participant proposes expanding p_0 in a Taylor series to show that it corresponds to rest mass plus Newtonian kinetic energy in the non-relativistic limit.
  • Another perspective discusses the duality between symmetries and conserved quantities, linking translations in time to energy and suggesting a unified view of momentum and energy.
  • One participant highlights the relationship E=mc^2, indicating that energy can be expressed in terms of mass and the speed of light, reinforcing the connection between energy and the first component of momentum.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints and arguments regarding the relationship between 4-momentum and energy/momentum components, with no clear consensus reached on the definitions or implications discussed.

Contextual Notes

Some discussions involve assumptions about conservation laws and the definitions of physical quantities that may not be universally accepted. The implications of Lorentz invariance and the role of coordinate systems are also mentioned without resolution.

Rudipoo
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
Firstly, apologies for the notation.

The 4-momentum of a massive particle (rest mass m) is defined by

p=mu

where u is the 4-velocity. Thus in a frame S in which a particle has 3-velocity u the components of p are

[p]=gamma*(mc,mu)

How can we then identify the zeroth component of this with the energy/c and the spatial component as the 3-momentum measured in S? In my lecture notes it just makes this assertion and I don't know where that comes from.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Rudipoo said:
Firstly, apologies for the notation.

The 4-momentum of a massive particle (rest mass m) is defined by

p=mu

where u is the 4-velocity. Thus in a frame S in which a particle has 3-velocity u the components of p are

[p]=gamma*(mc,mu)

How can we then identify the zeroth component of this with the energy/c and the spatial component as the 3-momentum measured in S? In my lecture notes it just makes this assertion and I don't know where that comes from.

Thanks

One argument is from conservation. If you accept that 4 momentum is conserved, then note that for Lorentz coordinates, the first component is always positive and is conserved separately from the other 3 components. This suggests it is total energy.

Partly, this is just a matter of definitions of mathematical objects that lead to physically meaningful predictions. In other words, it is defined this way because it works.

Note that the first component being energy is very much tied to 'common conventions' : use of locally Lorentz coordinates, with a particular order of listing components. There are coordinate independent definitions of these things that can be more useful in general relativity.
 
Rudipoo said:
[p]=gamma*(mc,mu)

How can we then identify the zeroth component of this with the energy/c and the spatial component as the 3-momentum measured in S?

[tex](\gamma mc^2)^2 = \gamma^2(mc^2)^2 = \frac{c^2}{c^2 - v^2}(mc^2)^2 = \left(1 + \frac{v^2}{c^2 - v^2}\right)(mc^2)^2 = m^2c^4 + \gamma^2 m^2 v^2 c^2 = m^2c^4 + p^2c^2 = E^2[/tex]

Or are you having trouble with p = γmv?
 
Rudipoo said:
How can we then identify the zeroth component of this with the energy/c and the spatial component as the 3-momentum measured in S?

I would start with the paper by Einstein "Does the inertia of a body depend upon its energy content?"
http://fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/ . Einstein describes a thought experiment that shows that mass and energy are equivalent.

Next you can expand [itex]p_0[/itex] in a Taylor series, giving [itex]p_0=m+mv^2/2+\ldots[/itex] (in units with c=1). That shows that in the Newtonian limit, [itex]p_0[/itex] corresponds to the rest mass plus the Newtonian kinetic energy.

Now we step back and ask ourselves what we expect the laws of physics to be in special relativity. We expect there to be conservation laws, and we know by the correspondence principle that these conservation laws must somehow reduce to the conservation laws of nonrelativistic mechanics at low velocities. We also expect that these conservation laws should be valid in any frame of reference. But in general when you write an equation involving quantities like m and v in one frame of reference, that equation will *not* be valid when you change to another frame of reference in SR. The only way it will be frame-independent is if the quantities on the two sides of the equation are both Lorentz scalars, or both four-vectors (or higher-order tensors).

Based on these considerations, if there is going to be a conservation law in SR that plays the appropriate role, the only possible conservation law is conservation of the momentum four-vector, and its timelike component should be interpreted as mass-energy. That doesn't mean that there *will* be such a conservation law, only that if there is, it must have these properties. But experiments do confirm it.
 
Another aspect of this unification. When you look at canonical formulations of mechanics you find a duality between (potential) symmetries and (potentially) conserved quantities, for example between rotation and angular momentum.

The dual of translations in space (parametrized by x,y,z) are the momenta P_x, P_y, P_z. The dual of translation in time is energy. So if you unify space+time you get a dual vector momentum+energy.

A related way to see it is that action units are action = momentum * distance = energy*time.
 
Rudipoo said:
Firstly, apologies for the notation.

The 4-momentum of a massive particle (rest mass m) is defined by

p=mu

where u is the 4-velocity. Thus in a frame S in which a particle has 3-velocity u the components of p are

[p]=gamma*(mc,mu)

How can we then identify the zeroth component of this with the energy/c and the spatial component as the 3-momentum measured in S? In my lecture notes it just makes this assertion and I don't know where that comes from.

Thanks

if this wasn't apparent, note:

[tex]E=mc^2\Rightarrow mc=\frac{mc^2}{c}=\frac{E}{c}[/tex]

Then Energy is the first component of the momentum... divided by some super common number in physics...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
  • · Replies 113 ·
4
Replies
113
Views
10K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
4K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K