Timeline for Does a constant 4-acceleration implies constant acceleration?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 17, 2017 at 10:12 | comment | added | RenatoRenatoRenato | Yes I think that the part where i wrote the norm $w^\mu w\_nu$ may be useless and misleading. I probably don't have a clear mind at the moment, it looks like that my first line of thought is right. the whole 4-vector w^\mu constant in a reference frame( due to the constancy of $a$) implies that it is constant in every reference frame, but the opposite is not true. That's how I read your answer, but I may be biased by my interpretation and misunderstood your answer. | |
| Jan 16, 2017 at 22:43 | comment | added | Voulkos | @Run like hell : I think so. By the way, your question would be more clear if it was clarified that the constancy concerns the 4- and 3-vectors and not their norms. | |
| Jan 16, 2017 at 22:35 | comment | added | RenatoRenatoRenato | Thank you for your clear explanation. So we can say "out loud" that what we mean when we talk about constant 4-acceleration is totally unrelate with what usually image when we say constant acceleration? | |
| Jan 16, 2017 at 19:14 | history | edited | Voulkos | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 301 characters in body
|
| Jan 16, 2017 at 18:59 | history | answered | Voulkos | CC BY-SA 3.0 |