Transformation law of momentum under Galilean transformation

In summary: All frames must agree on how long a spring is" - pardon a potentially stupid question, but that makes total sense in Newtonian mechanics. Does this fail in case of special relativity?In principle, it does.
  • #1
Shirish
244
32
I'm reading the article https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267938119_ON_THE_GALILEAN_COVARIANCE_OF_CLASSICAL_MECHANICS (pdf link here), in which the authors want to establish the transformation rule for momentum, assuming only that ##\vec{F}=d\vec{p}/dt## and notwithstanding the relation ##\vec{p}=m\vec{v}##.

For a quick background, we assume the Galilean transformation defined by
$$\vec{x}(t)\to\vec{x}'(t')=R\vec{x}(t)+\vec{u}t+\vec{a}\\t\to t'=t+b$$ where ##R## is the orthogonal matrix characterizing the rotation of the primed frame w.r.t. the unprimed frame, ##\vec{u}## is the velocity of the former w.r.t. the latter, ##\vec{a}## is the translation of the origins of the coordinate systems and ##b## is the time translation of clocks rigidly connected with each frame.

Now for the main part: we consider the fundamental equation of mechanics ##\vec{F}=d\vec{p}/dt##.
--------
The acting force ##\vec{F}## always transforms according to the simple rule
$$\vec{F}\to\vec{F}'(t')=R\vec{F}$$ since otherwise we would not have equal magnitudes of the forces in all inertial reference frames. It follows (from ##\vec{F}=d\vec{p}/dt##) that the transformation rule for momentum is of the form
$$\vec{p}(t)\to\vec{p}'(t')=R\vec{p}(t)+\vec{C}(R,\vec{u},\vec{a},b)$$
--------
I understood the parts before and after this paragraph, but have doubts on the above.

1. Why do we require the force magnitude to be the same in all inertial reference frames? Is it because it's experimentally observed and hence considered a postulate, or some other reason entirely?
The reason I suspect that it's based in experimental observation is because there's no reason, mathematically, why the magnitude of the force should be the same in all IRFs. I could just say that IRFs are an equivalence class with the Galilean transformation being the relation between them - this doesn't mathematically imply that the force magnitudes are invariant. But I could be completely wrong.

2. I didn't follow how the momentum transformation rule follows by integrating both sides - more specifically I don't understand from where ##\vec{u}## and ##\vec{a}## pop up.

Would really appreciate clarifications on both questions!
 
  • Like
Likes etotheipi and kent davidge
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Make you really clear what rotation in this context mean!Permanently rotations of a point leads to violation of Newtonian axioms for an observer which means the definition of an inertial frame is violated!So ,be careful with this part!

troglodyte
 
  • #3
Shirish said:
1. Why do we require the force magnitude to be the same in all inertial reference frames?
Inertial reference frames contain only real interaction forces, which the magnitude of can be directly measured in a frame invariant manner, for example with a spring. All frames must agree how long a spring is.
 
  • Like
Likes Shirish and etotheipi
  • #4
A.T. said:
Inertial reference frames contain only real interaction forces, which the magnitude of can be directly measured in a frame invariant manner, for example with a spring. All frames must agree how long a spring is.
"All frames must agree on how long a spring is" - pardon a potentially stupid question, but that makes total sense in Newtonian mechanics. Does this fail in case of special relativity? I've heard of length contraction in case of SR => all inertial observers won't agree on spring length => all inertial observers won't agree on invariance of force magnitude. Is this right or am I missing something?
 
  • #5
Shirish said:
Does this fail in case of special relativity? I've heard of length contraction in case of SR => all inertial observers won't agree on spring length => all inertial observers won't agree on invariance of force magnitude. Is this right or am I missing something?
That's right. In SR different inertial observers might not agree on length measurements. The magnitude of the Newtonian force measured by them will not be the same in general.

However a generalization of Newton's law comes about quite naturally in the SR formalism (i.e., in the differential geommetry formalism). So you still have the observers measuring the same magnitude of a vector which can be called "four force".
 
  • Like
Likes Shirish
  • #6
A.T. said:
All frames must agree how long a spring is.

They also need to agree about the stiffness of the spring. We know it is frame-independent, but can it be derived from classical mechanics? I would do it the other way around by prooving that m is frame-independent under Galilei transformation. But that also requires Newton III (or conservation of momentum).
 

1. What is the transformation law of momentum under Galilean transformation?

The transformation law of momentum under Galilean transformation is a principle in classical mechanics that describes how the momentum of a particle changes when observed from different inertial frames of reference. It states that the momentum of a particle is conserved and remains the same regardless of the observer's frame of reference.

2. How does the transformation law of momentum under Galilean transformation differ from the transformation law of position and velocity?

The transformation law of momentum differs from the transformation law of position and velocity in that it takes into account the relative velocity between the two frames of reference. This is because momentum is a vector quantity, while position and velocity are scalar quantities.

3. Does the transformation law of momentum under Galilean transformation hold true for all types of motion?

Yes, the transformation law of momentum under Galilean transformation holds true for all types of motion, including linear, rotational, and circular motion. This is because it is a fundamental principle in classical mechanics that is based on the conservation of momentum.

4. How is the transformation law of momentum under Galilean transformation related to the principle of relativity?

The transformation law of momentum under Galilean transformation is closely related to the principle of relativity, which states that the laws of physics are the same in all inertial frames of reference. The transformation law of momentum ensures that momentum remains conserved and consistent across different inertial frames of reference, thus supporting the principle of relativity.

5. Are there any limitations to the transformation law of momentum under Galilean transformation?

Yes, there are limitations to the transformation law of momentum under Galilean transformation. It is only applicable to systems that are not subject to external forces, such as friction or air resistance. Additionally, it is only accurate for low velocities compared to the speed of light. For high velocities, the transformation law of momentum must be modified to incorporate the principles of special relativity.

Similar threads

Replies
17
Views
948
Replies
43
Views
2K
Replies
35
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
746
Replies
4
Views
747
Replies
3
Views
696
  • Classical Physics
Replies
14
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
801
  • Mechanics
Replies
13
Views
986
Back
Top