- anonymous

Hyperbolic functions and Theory of Relativity.

- chestercat

See more answers at brainly.com

Get this expert

answer on brainly

SEE EXPERT ANSWER

Get your **free** account and access **expert** answers to this

and **thousands** of other questions

- anonymous

As some experiences from scientists the light has maximum speed about 3*10^8m/s
even though if two lights move against to each other

- anonymous

|dw:1338767458787:dw|

- anonymous

|dw:1338767523339:dw|

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.

## More answers

- anonymous

Collision?

- anonymous

no not collision but not different you can suppose that they strike together .

- anonymous

But important problem is that why the relativity speed not 2C and it is just C !!

- anonymous

Did you get it?
compare lights with other movement.

- anonymous

That's where I'm puzzle ?!?

- anonymous

moving

- anonymous

Einstein was a first to solve this problem with his theory is called Theory of Relativity

- anonymous

He's well known by it !

- anonymous

And he shows that light move in the own coordinate.

- anonymous

|dw:1338768308222:dw|

- anonymous

|dw:1338768367243:dw|

- anonymous

Talk about rotation, I'm not a fan of rotation of axis :(

- anonymous

the rotation formula in above does not work for light!!!

- anonymous

|dw:1338768505376:dw|

- anonymous

|dw:1338768588960:dw|

- anonymous

Oh, I see!

- anonymous

I showed that two rotation of unique vectors (1,0) and (0,1)

- anonymous

|dw:1338768774136:dw|

- anonymous

|dw:1338768856281:dw|

- anonymous

but light does not obey from this reality !!

- anonymous

do you know anything about hyperbolic function?
Coshx SinhX

- anonymous

|dw:1338769106783:dw|

- anonymous

|dw:1338769145066:dw|

- anonymous

|dw:1338769201119:dw|

- anonymous

Honestly, the formula you showing here is what I've read from the book, that's all !!!

- anonymous

finally light rotation formula has hyperbolic functions instead trigonometric

- anonymous

|dw:1338769358909:dw|

- anonymous

it makes some new concepts for light you can never believe those but they are all correct

- anonymous

Because hyperbolic involving with omega element!

- anonymous

no because hyperbolic functions have no limited range like sinx ,cosx

- anonymous

|dw:1338769575369:dw|

- anonymous

That's new concept to my understanding =)

- anonymous

|dw:1338769611999:dw|

- anonymous

Yep, taking notes now!

- anonymous

Do you mind solving a problem about find the parabola rotation?

- anonymous

*finding

- anonymous

x² - 3xy + 4y² +2x - y + 5 = 0

- anonymous

How do I eliminate the term xy to recognize its type of graph?

- anonymous

I have an own way for this problem.
it is so easy and cover whole of them.

- anonymous

I'm trying to work on the axis rotation formula, but just half way :(

- anonymous

we can't rely on the coefficient of x² and y²?

- anonymous

:)

- anonymous

This is literally the most confusing thread I've ever read. The answer the initial question is that in relativity, velocities don't add like that. The relativistic velocity addition law is
\[v_{rel} = \frac{v_1+v_2}{1+\frac{v_1 \cdot v_2}{c^2}} \]
at small velocities, this is approximately
\[v_{rel} \approx v_1 + v_2\]
which is what we use in everyday life.

- anonymous

ok and if v1=v2=c then vr=(c+c)/2=c
so I just want to show that why.

- anonymous

Ok.for prepare i am going to answer your last question.

- anonymous

I'm on it!

- anonymous

y' = x sinh (theta) + y cosh (theta)

- anonymous

That conclusion seems to have been drawn COMPLETELY out of thin air. Your rationale appears to have something to do with spatial rotations and hyperbolic functions which by some wayward tangent could I suppose be related to Lorentz boosts and rotations and the addition of rapidity rather than classical velocity but it is only through the most indirect channels that I could draw that conclusion, and if I knew nothing of relativity this would be meaningless!

- anonymous

I already know relativity. I'm just making the point that unless somebody was already well versed in relativity beyond the undergraduate level this would be completely meaningless, and even if they were this would only indirectly and momentarily flirt with coherence.

- anonymous

if you would like to know how the Laurence formula are made from hyperbolic functions go and watch a lecture in Stanford modern physic in youtube in this site:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAurgxtOdxY

- anonymous

Like @Jemurray3, I am completely unsure where this thread is going and almost uncertain where it began. As such, Je has acquired the best answer from me.

- anonymous

It began just for a individual person as an introduction not an academic lecture so I offered to jemurray3 a site for that.

- anonymous

If somebody asked you to explain basic mechanics to them, would you start ranting about Lagrangians and chaotic dynamics in phase space, or would you talk about bouncing basketballs and blocks on inclines?

- anonymous

I found out this way for a person who know rotation is better.so if you have any suggestion I would like to hear from you.

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.