Inertial frames in special relativity


by JustinLevy
Tags: frames, inertial, relativity, special
JustinLevy
JustinLevy is offline
#1
Apr19-06, 04:27 AM
P: 886
What is used to define an inertial frame in special relativity?
Do I need to take one of the postulates as defining an inertial frame?

What is bothering me is that I used to use Newton\'s first law to define inertial frames (a freely moving object will have a constant velocity). This can not be the definition in SR because I could use the galilean transformations and Newton\'s first law would still hold (yet these are not inertial frames according to SR).

So how do you define an inertial frame in SR?
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
SensaBubble: It's a bubble, but not as we know it (w/ video)
The hemihelix: Scientists discover a new shape using rubber bands (w/ video)
Microbes provide insights into evolution of human language
Andrew Mason
Andrew Mason is offline
#2
Apr19-06, 08:41 AM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
P: 6,591
Quote Quote by JustinLevy
What is used to define an inertial frame in special relativity?
Do I need to take one of the postulates as defining an inertial frame?

What is bothering me is that I used to use Newton\'s first law to define inertial frames (a freely moving object will have a constant velocity). This can not be the definition in SR because I could use the galilean transformations and Newton\'s first law would still hold (yet these are not inertial frames according to SR).

So how do you define an inertial frame in SR?
An inertial frame in SR is the same as in Newtonian mechanics: the frame of reference of an observer who is experiencing no external force (dp/dt=0).

AM
JustinLevy
JustinLevy is offline
#3
Apr20-06, 01:12 AM
P: 886
Quote Quote by Andrew Mason
An inertial frame in SR is the same as in Newtonian mechanics: the frame of reference of an observer who is experiencing no external force (dp/dt=0).
Specifying a freely moving observer only specifies one point (an origin if you will), but not an entire coordinate system. So unfortunately, that does not answer the question.

As I explained above, there are an infinite number of coordinate systems in which Newton\'s first law is true, yet the coordinate system is not an inertial one. You merely picked one of these freely moving points. If Newton\'s first law is not sufficient to define an inertial frame, definitely picking just one point will not be.


The more I think about it, I believe the answer is: an inertial frame in SR is defined by the Minkowski metric. Which in essence means the second postulate of SR is used to define an inertial frame.

Is this correct? Or are there other ways of looking at it?


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Special Relativity, accelerating frames, proper time Introductory Physics Homework 3
Special Relativty and Inertial Reference Frames... Special & General Relativity 3
special relativity and inertial frames of reference Introductory Physics Homework 4
special relativity and frames of reference Special & General Relativity 5