Accelerating trajectories in relativity

twinsen
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
Hi

I am trying to write a code to find the minimum time until a sphere of expanding light interacts with a set of N particles moving at speed. These particles are acted on by forces which remain constant over the time period.

My problem at the moment is that these particles have a mass and therefore should be restricted to v<c.

At higher speeds am I right to say that it takes relatively more energy to add speed, where an infinite energy/force would be required to get to c??

What would this acceleration velocity dependence be?? I presume I can then just integrate this along with the initial velocities to get the position as a function of time.

I am really just unsure as to how to apply relativity in this case where the particles are accelerating under a force..

Thanks in advance.

Alex
 
Physics news on Phys.org
twinsen said:
[...]
What would this acceleration velocity dependence be?? I presume I can then just integrate this along with the initial velocities to get the position as a function of time.

I am really just unsure as to how to apply relativity in this case where the particles are accelerating under a force..
[...]

Basically, you need to use a quantity (often called "rapidity") that is related to ordinary velocity (it's just a one-to-one non-linear transformation of velocity) that has the useful property that it adds linearly across inertial reference frames (ordinary velocity DOESN'T).

Taylor & Wheeler use it in their SPACETIME PHYSICS book, and I imagine most other good special relativity books do too. I think T&W used rapidity in an example showing how far a traveler could get, if constantly accelerating at 1g, in one human lifetime.

I also use rapidity in my paper on accelerating observers:

"Accelerated Observers in Special Relativity", PHYSICS ESSAYS, December 1999, p629.

If you don't already have T&W's book, that would be a good purchase no matter what. As I recall, the very first edition may not have had all the worked examples that later versions had, so try to get the latest one.

Mike Fontenot
 
Yeh that's great. Exactly what I was looking for :)

I will try and find Wheeler's book when I go back to uni! Really should remember all this stuff but sometimes it's quicker to ask.

Cheers

Alex
 
I asked a question here, probably over 15 years ago on entanglement and I appreciated the thoughtful answers I received back then. The intervening years haven't made me any more knowledgeable in physics, so forgive my naïveté ! If a have a piece of paper in an area of high gravity, lets say near a black hole, and I draw a triangle on this paper and 'measure' the angles of the triangle, will they add to 180 degrees? How about if I'm looking at this paper outside of the (reasonable)...
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...
Back
Top