Which expression for Relativistic Kinetic Energy is correct?

In summary, according to these sources, the Relativistic Kinetic Energy calculation for these two sources, seems to be different. One calculation uses gamma*m*c^2 while the other uses gamma*m*c^2 - m*c^2. It is unclear which one is correct, but it is most likely the second definition.
  • #1
rhz_prog
17
0
I saw that the Relativistic Kinetic Energy calculation for these two sources, seems to be different :

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/rocket.html
see : Conservation of Energy
EK = gamma*m*c^2

While here :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy
see : Relativistic kinetic energy of rigid bodies
EK = gamma*m*c^2 - m*c^2

Which one is right ? Or did I misunderstand something ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I haven't read the first link, but from what I know I'd say that the second definition is the right one. [itex]E = \gamma mc^{2}[/itex] is the total energy, not the kinetic energy. You can Taylor expand the first expression [itex]E = \gamma mc^{2} - mc^{2}[/itex] with respect to the variable v/c. The first term in the expression, [itex]\frac{1}{2}mv^{2}[/itex] represents the Newtonian kinetic energy, which will be the dominant term if v/c is small.
 
  • #3
Where does the first link say that? All I can see under "conservation of energy" is:

E_final = γmc^2 + E_L

?
 
  • #4
rhz_prog said:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/rocket.html
see : Conservation of Energy
EK = gamma*m*c^2

That page does not refer to [itex]\gamma m c^2[/itex] as kinetic energy, but rather, simply as "energy". In fact, the word "kinetic" does not appear on that page at all!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5
rhz_prog said:
I saw that the Relativistic Kinetic Energy calculation for these two sources, seems to be different :

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/rocket.html
see : Conservation of Energy
EK = gamma*m*c^2

While here :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy
see : Relativistic kinetic energy of rigid bodies
EK = gamma*m*c^2 - m*c^2

Which one is right ? Or did I misunderstand something ?

Your expressions are better written as:

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/rocket.html
see : Conservation of Energy
TE = gamma*m*c^2

While here :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy
see : Relativistic kinetic energy of rigid bodies
KE = gamma*m*c^2 - m*c^2

where TE is Total Energy and KE is Kinetic Energy.
The second expression can also be written as:

KE = TE - RE

where RE is Rest Energy or rest mass energy.

Total Energy can can also be found from this relationship:

[itex]TE = \sqrt{(gamma*m*v*c)^2+(m*c^2)^2} = \sqrt{(pc)^2+(mc^2)^2}[/itex]

which can be written as:

[itex]TE = \sqrt{ME^2+RE^2}[/itex]

where ME is Momentum Energy.

By rearranging this becomes :

[itex]RE = \sqrt{TE^2-ME^2}[/itex]

Since rest energy is usually an invariant, the quantity [itex]\sqrt{TE^2-ME^2}[/itex] is the same when switching from one reference frame to another. In fact, in a perfectly elastic collision, the quantity [itex]\sqrt{TE^2-ME^2}[/itex] is the same for a given particle before and after the collision.

Hope that helps.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

FAQ: Which expression for Relativistic Kinetic Energy is correct?

What is relativistic kinetic energy?

Relativistic kinetic energy is the energy an object possesses due to its mass and its motion at speeds close to the speed of light. It takes into account the effects of special relativity, such as time dilation and length contraction, on an object's energy.

How is relativistic kinetic energy different from classical kinetic energy?

Classical kinetic energy is based on Newton's laws of motion and only applies to objects moving at non-relativistic speeds. Relativistic kinetic energy takes into account the effects of special relativity and is used to calculate the energy of objects moving at speeds close to the speed of light.

What is the formula for relativistic kinetic energy?

The formula for relativistic kinetic energy is E = (γ - 1)mc^2, where E is the energy, γ is the Lorentz factor (1/√(1 - v^2/c^2)), m is the mass of the object, and c is the speed of light.

How does relativistic kinetic energy affect an object's mass?

According to Einstein's famous equation, E = mc^2, energy and mass are equivalent. As an object's speed approaches the speed of light, its relativistic kinetic energy increases, causing its mass to also increase. This effect is known as mass-energy equivalence.

In what situations is relativistic kinetic energy important to consider?

Relativistic kinetic energy is most important to consider when dealing with objects that are moving at speeds close to the speed of light, such as particles in particle accelerators or objects in space that are traveling at high velocities. It is also important in understanding the behavior of subatomic particles and in fields such as astrophysics and nuclear physics.

Similar threads

Back
Top