Odd Force Equation

For the discussion of the sciences. Physics problems, chemistry equations, biology weirdness, it all goes here.

Moderators: gmalivuk, Moderators General, Prelates

Odd Force Equation

Postby foxgloves » Thu Apr 12, 2012 1:47 am UTC

I was reading a book, and I ran into this odd equation:

F=\frac{d}{dt}(\frac{mv}{(1-\frac{v^2}{c^2})})


Where does this equation come from and what does it represent?
foxgloves
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 2:47 am UTC

Re: Odd Force Equation

Postby bosonicyouth » Thu Apr 12, 2012 3:59 am UTC

It's the relativistic version of Newton's second law. If the velocity v << c, where c is the speed of light, the denominator vanishes and you obtain the Newtonian version F=ma. However, as an object approaches the speed of light the denominator approaches zero, and the force required to further speed it up approaches infinity. So this always enforces the universal speed limit of c for massive objects and is consistent with other relativistic effects such as time dilation and length contraction, all of which contain the Lorentz factor in some form, as seen here also (only squared).
bosonicyouth
 
Posts: 90
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 8:59 am UTC
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: Odd Force Equation

Postby Qaanol » Thu Apr 12, 2012 4:54 am UTC

Yeah, the “real” version of Newton’s 2nd law, as in the version that’s true and generally applicable, is “Force equal rate of change of momentum”, or symbolically F=dp/dt. That is the definition of “force”. You’ll never see a proof of Newton’s 2nd law, because it is not a theorem but actually a statement of definition.

So, once you know that force is defined as F=dp/dt, then calculating force just means taking the derivative of momentum. And as it turns out, in special relativity the momentum of an object is p=γmv, where γ is the Lorentz factor γ=dt/dτ=1/√(1-v2/c2).
Small Government Liberal
User avatar
Qaanol
 
Posts: 2234
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:55 pm UTC

Re: Odd Force Equation

Postby eSOANEM » Thu Apr 12, 2012 9:31 am UTC

The thing is, the lorentz factor has a square root in it so what foxgloves has actually written is very odd (and will only hold at rest). I guess they made typo/transcribed it incorrectly.
Gear wrote:I'm not sure if it would be possible to constantly eat enough chocolate to maintain raptor toxicity without killing oneself.
User avatar
eSOANEM
 
Posts: 1916
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:39 pm UTC
Location: Grantebrycge


Return to Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests