How Does a Cosmic Ray Measure Temperature Changes in the Sun?

  • Thread starter Living_Dog
  • Start date
In summary, the exercise asks for a proof of the result:\frac{dT}{d\tau} = \partial_u T = <dT,u>which relates the temperature gradient inside the sun, T(Q), to the 4-velocity of a cosmic ray, u. The proof involves showing that the temperature gradient can be written as a directional derivative in both the rest frame of the sun and the moving frame of the cosmic ray. This shows that the two expressions, \partial_u T and <dT,u>, are equivalent and can be used interchangeably.
  • #1
Living_Dog
100
0
(This is not homework. I am reading MTW on my own.) I have worked on this and worked on this and cannot see how to solve it. It is Exercise #2.6, on page 65 of MTW. I quote verbatim:

"To each event Q inside the sun one attributes a temperature T(Q), the temperature measured by a thermometer at rest in the hot sun there. Then T(Q) is a function; no coordinates are required for its definition and discussion. A cosmic ray from outer space flies through the sun with 4-velocity u. Show that, as measured by the cosmic ray's clock, the time derivative in its vicinity is

[tex]\frac{dT}{d\tau} = \partial_u T = <dT,u>[/tex].​

In a local Lorentz frame inside the sun, this question can be written

[tex]\frac{dT}{d\tau} = u^\alpha \frac{\partial T}{\partial x^\alpha} = \frac{1}{\sqrt(1 - v^2)} \frac{\partial T}{\partial t} + \frac{v^j}{\sqrt(1 - v^2)} \frac{\partial T}{\partial x^j}[/tex].​

Why is this result reasonable?"

--

The temperature gradient inside the sun would be [tex]\frac{dT}{dt}[/tex]. But wrt the cosmic ray, the temperature gradient is [tex]\frac{dT}{d\tau}[/tex], which is the above equation. No? I guess I am asking what am I supposed to show?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You're asked to show from coordinate-free viewpoint (and it is quite simple to show) that

[tex]
\frac{dT}{d\tau} = <dT, u>
[/tex]

I don't know what they mean by "reasonable".
 
  • #3
I think this is reasonable because the expression for the time derivative of T turns out to largely depend on the first term at the lower speeds and actually reduces to the non-relativistic case by putting [tex]v=0[/tex]. Other than this, I think there wouldn't be any "reasonable" answer to their question.

AB
 
  • #4
hamster143 said:
You're asked to show from coordinate-free viewpoint (and it is quite simple to show) that

[tex]
\frac{dT}{d\tau} = <dT, u>
[/tex]

I don't know what they mean by "reasonable".

Well, the reasonable part is more of a conceptual answer. It's basically testing you if you understand the equation.

But my concern was the first bit - where you say it is "simple." My problem is that it seems tautological!

If I write out the derivative I get the bottom expression. So how does one show the top expression without using the bottom expression... in "coordinate free" language??

Am I being clear - I see both expressions, top and bottom, as being identical.
 
  • #5
I think what they want is this:

[tex]
\frac{dT}{d\tau}=\frac{dT}{dx^\alpha}\frac{dx^\alpha}{d\tau}=\frac{dT}{dx^\alpha}u^\alpha=\partial_{\boldsymbol{u}}T=\langle \boldsymbol{d}T,\boldsymbol{u}\rangle
[/tex]

The reason I love MTW is that you can never tell if a problem is infuriatingly easy or impossible.

-Matthew
 
  • #6
dodelson said:
I think what they want is this:

[tex]
\frac{dT}{d\tau}=\frac{dT}{dx^\alpha}\frac{dx^\alpha}{d\tau}=\frac{dT}{dx^\alpha}u^\alpha=\partial_{\boldsymbol{u}}T=\langle \boldsymbol{d}T,\boldsymbol{u}\rangle
[/tex]

The reason I love MTW is that you can never tell if a problem is infuriatingly easy or impossible.

-Matthew

I did that but these expressions are supposed to be from two different points of view - one from the rest frame of the sun and the other from the cosmic ray's moving frame. But what you did, and I did this also thus why I still don't get it, is put the two equations together.

We have different ideas about books. I think they should explain - and so teach. (I mean to say, that's how I see what the above equation is - and thus my ignorance.)
 
Last edited:
  • #7


I think I have a solution for this problem. It came to me this early AM.

In the sun's frame:

Suppose the particle was moving with non-rel. speed, v, then the temperature gradient along that direction would simply be:

v o[tex]\nabla T(Q)[/tex],​

namely, the directional derivative.

But in this case the speed is relativistic, |v| <~ c. So u = [tex](\gamma_v,\gamma_vv)[/tex] and so the directional derivative becomes Eq. (2.37):

[tex]\gamma \frac{\partial T}{\partial t} + \gamma v^j \frac{\partial T}{\partial x^j}[/tex],​

which equals [tex]u^\alpha\frac{\partial T}{\partial x^\alpha} \equiv \frac{dT}{d\tau}[/tex].

In the particle's frame:

The particle "sees" a number of (hyper-)planes of temperature levels called dT (the temp. grad. 1-form). So, for the particle moving with 4-velocity u, the directional derivative is the number of piercings of u with the 1-form dT, or <dT, u>. Thus,

[tex]<dT,u> \equiv \partial_u T[/tex].​

Finally, since [tex]\partial_u f \equiv \frac{df}{d\lambda}[/tex] with [tex]f \rightarrow T[/tex], and [tex]\lambda \rightarrow \tau[/tex] we have Eq. (2.36):

[tex]<dT,u> \equiv \partial_u T = \frac{dT}{d\tau}
[/tex].​


Q.E.D. (I believe)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

FAQ: How Does a Cosmic Ray Measure Temperature Changes in the Sun?

What is the concept of gravitation?

The concept of gravitation is the force that attracts two bodies towards each other. It is a fundamental force in the universe that governs the motion of planets, stars, and other celestial bodies.

Who first discovered the concept of gravitation?

The concept of gravitation was first discovered by Sir Isaac Newton in the 17th century. He formulated the law of universal gravitation, which states that every object in the universe attracts every other object with a force that is directly proportional to their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.

How does the mass and distance between two objects affect the force of gravitation?

As stated in Newton's law of universal gravitation, the force of gravitation is directly proportional to the masses of the two objects and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. This means that the greater the masses of the objects, the stronger the force of gravitation, and the farther apart they are, the weaker the force of gravitation.

What is the difference between mass and weight in relation to gravitation?

Mass is the measure of the amount of matter in an object, while weight is the measure of the force of gravity acting on an object. In relation to gravitation, the mass of an object affects the force of gravitation between two objects, while weight is a result of the force of gravity acting on an object on Earth's surface.

How does the concept of gravitation impact our daily lives?

The concept of gravitation has a significant impact on our daily lives, as it is responsible for keeping the planets in orbit around the sun, the moon around the Earth, and the tides in the oceans. It also plays a crucial role in the functioning of GPS and satellite communication systems. Without the force of gravitation, life on Earth would not be possible as we know it.

Back
Top