anonymous
  • anonymous
Hyperbolic functions and Theory of Relativity.
Physics
  • Stacey Warren - Expert brainly.com
Hey! We 've verified this expert answer for you, click below to unlock the details :)
SOLVED
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
schrodinger
  • schrodinger
I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!
anonymous
  • 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
  • anonymous
|dw:1338767458787:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
|dw:1338767523339:dw|

Looking for something else?

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

More answers

anonymous
  • anonymous
Collision?
anonymous
  • anonymous
no not collision but not different you can suppose that they strike together .
anonymous
  • anonymous
But important problem is that why the relativity speed not 2C and it is just C !!
anonymous
  • anonymous
Did you get it? compare lights with other movement.
anonymous
  • anonymous
That's where I'm puzzle ?!?
anonymous
  • anonymous
moving
anonymous
  • anonymous
Einstein was a first to solve this problem with his theory is called Theory of Relativity
anonymous
  • anonymous
He's well known by it !
anonymous
  • anonymous
And he shows that light move in the own coordinate.
anonymous
  • anonymous
|dw:1338768308222:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
|dw:1338768367243:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
Talk about rotation, I'm not a fan of rotation of axis :(
anonymous
  • anonymous
the rotation formula in above does not work for light!!!
anonymous
  • anonymous
|dw:1338768505376:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
|dw:1338768588960:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
Oh, I see!
anonymous
  • anonymous
I showed that two rotation of unique vectors (1,0) and (0,1)
anonymous
  • anonymous
|dw:1338768774136:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
|dw:1338768856281:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
but light does not obey from this reality !!
anonymous
  • anonymous
do you know anything about hyperbolic function? Coshx SinhX
anonymous
  • anonymous
|dw:1338769106783:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
|dw:1338769145066:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
|dw:1338769201119:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
Honestly, the formula you showing here is what I've read from the book, that's all !!!
anonymous
  • anonymous
finally light rotation formula has hyperbolic functions instead trigonometric
anonymous
  • anonymous
|dw:1338769358909:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
it makes some new concepts for light you can never believe those but they are all correct
anonymous
  • anonymous
Because hyperbolic involving with omega element!
anonymous
  • anonymous
no because hyperbolic functions have no limited range like sinx ,cosx
anonymous
  • anonymous
|dw:1338769575369:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
That's new concept to my understanding =)
anonymous
  • anonymous
|dw:1338769611999:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
Yep, taking notes now!
anonymous
  • anonymous
Do you mind solving a problem about find the parabola rotation?
anonymous
  • anonymous
*finding
anonymous
  • anonymous
x² - 3xy + 4y² +2x - y + 5 = 0
anonymous
  • anonymous
How do I eliminate the term xy to recognize its type of graph?
anonymous
  • anonymous
I have an own way for this problem. it is so easy and cover whole of them.
anonymous
  • anonymous
I'm trying to work on the axis rotation formula, but just half way :(
anonymous
  • anonymous
we can't rely on the coefficient of x² and y²?
anonymous
  • anonymous
:)
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
  • anonymous
ok and if v1=v2=c then vr=(c+c)/2=c so I just want to show that why.
anonymous
  • anonymous
Ok.for prepare i am going to answer your last question.
anonymous
  • anonymous
I'm on it!
anonymous
  • anonymous
y' = x sinh (theta) + y cosh (theta)
anonymous
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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.