lecture 14

Topics: Rocket motion Review of circular motion Spinning relativistic string Relativistic trafc Rocket motion The surprising thing (to me) about relativistic rocket motion is that there is a sense in which it looks just the same as nonrelativistic rocket motion - at least in the rest frame of the rocket. Nonrelativistic rocket motion looks like this if the fuel is ejected at speed u:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

dm

pr = 0 t=0 pf = 0 pr = m dv t = dt pf = dm u

u dm momentum conservation

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

dv

dp dv dm =m = u = Force dt dt dt Relativistic rocket motion looks like this:

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

(1)

dm

Er = m pr = 0 t=0 pf = 0 Ef = dm Er = m pr = m dv t = dt pf = u dm Ef = dm NOT dmu (2)

u (Ef , pf )

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

dv

momentum conservation dv dm dp =m = u = Force dt dt dt

There are two compensating differences. Mass is no longer conserved in the relativistic situation, so it is not correct to say that the decrease in mass of the rocket is equal to the mass of the fuel ejected. But it is correct to use energy conservation and say that the decrease in energy of 1

the rocket (which in the rest frame is just the decrease in mass) is equal to the energy of the fuel ejected. But then the momentum of the fuel ejected is not u times the mass, but rather u times the energy, which is the same as we got in the nonrelativistic case. There are lots of differences that emerge as the velocity of the rocket becomes large, but these are entirely the result of time dilation and the different relation in relativity between the momentum p of the rocket and its speed, v . Review of circular motion You have all learned in previous physics courses about uniform circular motion. I thought that it would be useful to review this before going on to discuss rotations in more generality. So let us consider an object that is moving in a circle of radius R centered at the origin with a constant speed, v . This is motion in a single plane (because every circle lies in some plane), so it is convenient to choose our coordinate system so that the motion is in the x-y plane with z = 0. We can also choose to have the motion in the counterclockwise direction as seen from above (by choosing which is the positive z direction). Then the motion of our particle can be written as x(t) = R cos(t + ) y (t) = R sin(t + ) z (t) = 0 (3)

where is the angular velocity in radians per unit time. This denes the position vector of the particle, r (t), in the usual way: r (t) = x(t) x + y (t) y + z (t) z =x R cos(t + ) + y R sin(t + ) (4)

This should be familiar. We saw it earlier in the course in another context when we were discussing the connection between uniform circular motion and complex exponential. This motion in the x-y plane is precisely the same as the motion of the complex exponential R eit in the complex plane. The velocity of the particle is the derivative (t) = x v (t) = r R sin(t + ) + y R cos(t + ) (6) (5)

Note that because sin2 + cos2 = 1, the length of v (t) is R , so sure enough, the speed of the particle is constant, v = |v (t)| = R , (7) even though the velocity vector is constantly changing.

The relation between (3) and (6) is illustrated below at time t (for > 0): y
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ ....... ..... . . ...... .... . . .... ... . . ... ... . . ... ... . . . . . ... .. . . . . .. .. . . . .. . .. . .. . . . . .. . . . .. . .. . . . .. . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. .. . . . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . ... . . .. . ... . ... . ... . . ... .... . . .... . ..... . .... . .. ............... . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

v (t)

.. ..... .. .... ...... . .... . . . . .... ... .... ........... t + .....

r (t) .............

.....

(8)

Note that v (t) is always perpendicular to r (t) and still in the x-y plane (you can see this from the diagram, but you can also see it by explicitly computing the dot product, r (t) v (t) and showing that it is zero for all t).1 We can compute the acceleration of the particle by differentiating (6). (t) = x a (t) = v R 2 cos(t + ) y R 2 sin(t + ) = 2 r (t) . (9)

The accleration in (9) is always directed to the center of the circle and the magnitude of the acceleration is 2 R, or, using (7), this gives the (I hope familiar) formula a = |a (t)| = 2 R =
1

v2 R

(10)

In fact, r (t) v (t) = 0 for any motion on a circle, centered at the origin, whether it is uniform or not. You can see this by differentiating r (t) r (t) = R2 .

Here is (8) again with the acceleration shown this time. y

. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . ........ ..... . .......... . .... . ..... . ... . .... . . ... ... . . . ... . . . ... . ... . . . .. .. . . . .. . . . . .. . . .. . .. . . . .. .. . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. .. . . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . ... . . .. . ... . . ... ... . . ... .... . . ... . ...... . .... . . . . .. ............. . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

v (t)

a (t)

.. ..... .. .... ...... . .... . . . . .... .... .... ........... t + . . . ...... ..... ...

r (t) .............

.....

(11)

The moral of this is much more general than it appears. Note that for uniform circular motion, as to a = v = we go from r to v = r r, each time we turn the vector counterclockwise by 90 and multiply by . We have thought about this in the context of a position vector. But any other vector (as we have already seen with v ) that undergoes uniform circular motion behaves the same way. We can get the time derivative by turning counterclockwise by 90 and multiplying by . This is telling us something very deep and important not just uniform circular motion, but about rotations and motion in general. We will begin to explore it in more generality in the next lecture. Here is a simple application that is related to something that we know in various other ways. Suppose that we have a force of the form F (r) = r r (12)

directed toward the origin with magnitude r . For what value of do the circular orbits of a mass subject to this force have the same angular frequency independent of r? We want F (r) = r r = ma = m 2 r r so 2 = (13)

1 r (14) m and if = 1 the angular frequency is independent of r. This is just a harmonic oscillator in more than one dimension. Spinning relativistic string Next time, we are going to start talking more seriously about the concept of angular momentum. We will nd that it arises from the general principle of rotation invariance, and as such applies just 4

as well to relativistic systems as in nonrelativistic mechanics. Indeed, one of the ways we know that relativistic string exists is by studying systems of quarks and antiquark that carry angular momentum. Let us study such a system. Consider a system of a massless quark and antiquark connected by relativistic string with tension T in its rest frame. Let us determine the conditions under which this system can rotate with the string straight and the quark and antiquark moving in a circle of radius as illustrated below:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

v=1 (15)

...................................................................................................................................................... .

The rst thing to note is that the quark and antiquark must move at the speed of light because they are massless, by assumption. This has three immediate consequences. One is that the angular velocity of the system is (n relativistic units) = 1 (16)

The second is that the quark and antiquark can carry only negligible momentum. This is because the force from the string at the end is Lorentz transformed to zero. You saw in Morins book that the force from a string moving in the transverse direction with velocity v is reduced to T 1 v 2 . This effect is simply time dilation. The transverse components of momentum do not change under a Lorentz transformation. Because we see moving clocks tick slowly by a factor of 1/ , we also see the rate of change of transverse momentum reduced by a factor of 1/ . In this case, where the quark and antiquark at the end are massless and move at the speed of light, 1/ = 0 and thus the rate of change of the momentum of the quark and antiquark must vanish. But the rate 5

of change of momentum of a particle with momentum of magnitude p in uniform circular motion is p . Because = 0, we must have p = 0. Thus all the momentum and angular momentum in this system is carried by the string. The third consequence is that at a point on the string a distance r from the center is moving with velocity r/ , as shown in (15). Next, let us check that the system can hold itself together. The force from the string at some radius r0 must be right to produce the appropriate rate of change of momentum, which is the change of momentum associated with the uniform circular motion of the part of the string for r > r0 . To see that this works, lets calculate the momentum carried by the portion of the string for r > r0 . The contribution from an innitesimal bit of string between r and r + dr is dm v= 1 v2 T dr 1 r2 /
2

(17)

Then the momentum carried by the string for r > r0 is T dr

r0

r
2

1 r2 /

(18)

If we change variables to z = r/ , this becomes T

1 r0 /

z dz = T 1 z2

1 r0 /

dz

d 1 z2 = T dz

1 r2 /

(19)

The rate of change of momentum is then p = p/ = T

2 1 r0 / 2

(20)

This is right, because it reproduces the string force at r0 Now that we know how this object moves and that it hangs together, we can ask what its energy and angular momentum are (it is at rest, so the total 3-momentum is zero). The energy from a small bit of string is just like (17) but without the factor of r/ at the end. The total energy is then

dr

T dr 1 r2 / 2

=T

1 1

dz 1 z2

(21)

This should be a familiar integral we can make the trigonometric substitution z = sin to write it as E=T
/2 /2

dz = d cos

(22)

d = T

(23)

To compute the angular momentum, we need an additional factor of rv = r2 / in the integrand of (21): 1 T r2 dr z 2 dz dr =T 2 (24) 1 1 z2 1 r2 / 2 6

The same trigonometric substitution allows us to write this as L=T

2 /2 /2

1 d sin2 = T 2

(25)

Now the point is that we can eliminate from (23) and (25) and write this as a relation between the energy and angular momentum E 2 = 2 T 2 2 = 2T L (26) Sure enough, when we look at quark-antiquark bound states, we see families of particles with similar properties in which E 2 grows linearly with L within each family.2 Here is some representative data:

The data shows a slope of about

1 GeV2 (27) h From this we can extract an approximate value for T , which works out to about 15 tons! These little particles are pulled by a rather strong force! Thats why quarks and antiquarks dont get very far apart! 2T
2

See for example http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0103274.

Relativistic trafc Consider relativistic trafc on a Boston street. We will make the completely unrealistic assumption that the trafc is owing smoothly, with evenly spaced cars moving in opposite directions at speed v as shown below.

(28) You will notice that there is something else that is unrealistic about this picture. There are plentiful parking spaces on the side of the road. This picture is animated in the program TRAFFIC.EXE. Now let us look at this picture from the inertial frame of a driver in the lower lane of trafc. In the animation, you can change the inertial frame gradually by pressing the right horizontal arrow. Each time you press it, you increase the speed of the frame, until you to get to an inertial frame that is moving along with the lower cars. Of course, as you increase the speed of the inertial frame, the parking spaces appear to move in the opposite direction, and the cars in the other lane move by faster. But here, we also see a number of effects of Lorentz contraction. The animation assumes that the initial speed of the cars is 10 c, so that things are very relativistic and Lorentz contraction 11 is a big effect. I have done this to make the important effects show up better. In the actual physical demo you will see, the effect is much smaller, but the qualitative message is the same. Notice that as the lower cars slow down in the moving frame, they also appear longer. This is because they appeared Lorentz contracted in the initial frame, and going to the moving frame undoes some of the effect. The parking spaces and the upper cars going in the opposite direction are Lorentz contracted more and more as the speed of the frame increases. Finally, we get to the frame in which the lower cars are at rest, which looks sort of like this:

v=0

v=0

v=0

v=0

v=0

v=0

(29) There are several things to notice about this. One is you see all the other cars in your lane farther apart than they were in the frame of the road, and they dont seem to t into the parking spaces anymore. This is just Lorentz contraction. This is the same thing that is going on the problem of the relativistic chocolate chip cookies in David Morins book. There you remember that the cookie dough was moving at relativistic speed on a conveyor belt and a circular cookie press was stamping 8

out cookies - but the because the dough is Lorentz contracted, the cookies come out elongated. The cars going in the other direction are Lorentz contracted even more, and look shorter and closer together. Something may be bothering you about this. How can the density of parking spaces change relative to the density of the cars? Where do those extra parking spaces come from? If we can harness this, we will be rich beyond the dreams of avarice. In fact, we cant make any money on it, because these extra parking spaces are coming in from the past and the future. This is possible everywhere if we have an innite line of them stretching out in both directions, but it is always possible in some nite region of the roadway. The density in the rest frame is not the same as the density in a moving frame because of the relativity of simultaneity (which is the culprit in most such puzzles). But again, the effect is even larger for the cars going in the opposite direction. Because they are moving faster, they are even more Lorentz contracted than the parking spaces. Of course, I dont really have any relativistic cars available to test these theories. But there is a very interesting analogy. Instead of two opposing lanes of trafc, consider current in a wire owing up and back from a battery.
. ................. . . . . . ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... . . . . ..... . + + + + + + + + + + . . . . + . . . . . .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . + + + + + + + + + + . . . . .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... . . . .................. . .

In this analogy, the negatively charged electrons are the cars and the rest of the electrical structure of the wire form positively charged parking spaces. Of course the actual motion is more chaotic more like real Boston trafc. But the net current is as shown. The whole system looks electrically neutral because there is one car for each parking space. Now the question is, what forces do the components of one of the wires feel do to the moving electrons in the other. We expect from the lab frame where everything is neutral that there is no force on the xed positive matrix - the parking spaces. And since there is no force in the lab frame, there is no force in any frame. But what force do the electrons feel. Now it is not so obvious, because the electrons are moving in the lab frame. So even though everything is neutral, there might still be a force that depends on velocity. Thus it is simplest to think about it in the inertial frame moving along with the electrons in one of the wires. In this frame, any force on the electrons proportional to velocity goes away, because they are at rest. But in this frame, as the animation or (29) shows, the electrons in the lower wire see far more negatively charge electrons in the upper wire than they see positively charged parking spaces for the electrons. Thus they experience a repulsive force. In the original frame, there is no Coulomb force because everything is neutral. In this frame, the repulsive force is still there, but it is interpreted as magnetism. When I connect the battery and get my two lanes of trafc moving, there should be a repulsive force between them. Thus as you will see in more detail in Physics 15b, magnetism is a relativistic effect. When you feel the mysterious force between two magnets, that I am sure has fascinated all of you at one time or another, you are feeling in your bones the effect of special relativity. 9