1
$\begingroup$

In galilean relativity $$p=mv$$ and $$KE=\frac{1}{2}mv^2$$

If I understand it in special relativity the equation for momentum is $$p=\frac{mv}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}$$ In galilean relativity there is the equation $$\frac{p}{m}=v$$ while in special relativity the equation is $$\frac{p}{m}=\frac{v}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}$$ In galilean relativity $$KE=\frac{1}{2}m\frac{{p}^2}{{m}^2}$$ and if this equation holds in special relativity it produces the equation $$KE=\frac{1}{2}m\frac{v^2}{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}$$ Is this a correct way to express kinetic energy in special relativity?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ No, because like all the previous equations, $E=p^2/2m$ is not true in special relativity. $\endgroup$ – Javier Mar 4 '16 at 22:28
  • $\begingroup$ The correct relationship between energy and momentum is $p = Ev/c^2$. You then have to subtract off $mc^2$ and Taylor expand to get kinetic energy. $\endgroup$ – knzhou Mar 4 '16 at 23:17
2
$\begingroup$

It is useful to understand how the expression for kinetic energy is arrived at in non relativistic mechanics and apply that for the relativistic case. Let's say we have a body at stand still and apply a force $F = \frac{d(mv)}{dt}$ to get it moving. The energy gained by the body is then

$ E_k = \int_0^t Fdx = \int_0^t \frac{d(mv)}{dt} dx = \int_0^tmv dv = \frac{1}{2} m v^2 $

Doing the same in relativistic mechanics you need to take into account the body gets heavier (or more "inertial") by a factor $\gamma = (1-\frac{v^2}{c^2})^{-1/2}$ with $m$ now its rest mass and the integral works out differently. Calculating the work done we will find:

$ E_k = \int_0^t Fdx =\int_0^t \frac{d(\gamma mv)}{dt} dx = \int_0^tv d(m\gamma v) $

This integral is slightly more involved but will result in $E_k = (\gamma -1 ) mc^2$. Physically a lot more work has to be done to accelerate the body as it gets heavier.

Note that in the classical case you can write $E_k = \int_0^t \frac{p}{m} dp = \frac{p^2}{2m}$ but not anymore in relativistic mechanics as you can see from the integral expression in the above which becomes

$\int_0^tv d(m\gamma v) = \int_0^t\frac{p}{\gamma m} dp$.

So your expression for $E_k$ in terms of momentum is incorrect.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thank's! I was also wondering what would be the equation for kinetic energy if $\gamma = (1-\frac{v^2}{c^2})^{-1/2}$ was replaced with $\gamma = \frac{v^2}{c^2}+1$? $\endgroup$ – Anders Gustafson Mar 5 '16 at 5:43
  • $\begingroup$ I found $E_k = \frac{1}{2} m v^2 (1 + \frac{3v^2}{4c^2})$ in that case but why are you interested in that? Did you mean $\gamma = 1 + \frac{v^2}{2c^2}$? That would be the correct $\gamma$ expanded to first order in $\frac{v^2}{c^2}$. $\endgroup$ – Jan Bos Mar 6 '16 at 12:22
1
$\begingroup$

Kinetic energy in Special Relativity is $KE=(\gamma -1)mc^2$, where $\gamma $ is the Lorentz factor. This is derived from the relativistic equation for total energy, $E^2 = (pc)^2 + ((mc)^2)^2$; the negative term removes the rest energy from the total energy.

The Galilean kinetic energy is the limit of this expression for small velocities.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ This should be a comment, an answer should explain why that is correct and why OP's expression is not. $\endgroup$ – Ryan Unger Mar 4 '16 at 23:11

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.