Register to reply

Inhomogeneous (poincare) lorentz transormation

Share this thread:
spacelike
#1
Dec29-11, 10:26 AM
P: 37
I'm reading a physics book and in the section on relativity they are using the Einstein summation convention, with 4vectors and matrices.

They say that the transformations take the form:
[tex]x^{\prime\mu}=x^{\nu}\Lambda^{\mu}_{\nu}+C^{\mu}[/tex]
where it is required that [itex]\Lambda^{\mu}_{\nu}[/itex] satisfy the following relation:
[tex]\eta_{\mu\nu}\Lambda^{\mu}_{\alpha}\Lambda^{\nu}_{\beta}=\eta_{\alpha\b eta}[/tex]
(note: I found the same thing on wikipedia, so you can see it in context if you like. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz...etime_interval it appears a tiny bit down from the section that the link takes you to.)

My problem is that this seems impossible to satisfy by my current understanding, but I know I must be wrong, I just cannot see how.

So we are summing over [itex]\mu[/itex] and [itex]\nu[/itex] in the above relation right? and we do this for all [itex]\alpha[/itex] and [itex]\beta[/itex] in order to satisfy all the components of the matrices.
My problem is what happens when we get to the following situation?:
[tex]\mu=0, \nu=1, \alpha=0, \beta=0[/tex]
But, [itex]\eta_{01}=0[/itex], and [itex]\eta_{00}=-1[/itex]. So there is no possible values of the [itex]\Lambda[/itex]'s that will satisfy this because we now have 0=-1, which is a contradiction.

Where did I go wrong with my thinking? Thanks.
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
Sapphire talk enlivens guesswork over iPhone 6
Geneticists offer clues to better rice, tomato crops
UConn makes 3-D copies of antique instrument parts
George Jones
#2
Dec29-11, 10:37 AM
Mentor
George Jones's Avatar
P: 6,230
In an inertial coordinate system,
[tex]\eta_{\alpha\beta} = \eta_{\mu\nu}\Lambda^{\mu}_{\alpha}\Lambda^{\nu}_{ \beta} = -\Lambda^{0}_{\alpha}\Lambda^{0}_{ \beta} + \Lambda^{1}_{\alpha}\Lambda^{1}_{ \beta} + \Lambda^{2}_{\alpha}\Lambda^{2}_{ \beta} + \Lambda^{3}_{\alpha}\Lambda^{3}_{ \beta}[/tex]
Matterwave
#3
Dec29-11, 12:07 PM
Sci Advisor
Matterwave's Avatar
P: 2,671
You're not summing, you've just assumed 4 values for the 4 variables. Remember you have to sum over mu and nu.

spacelike
#4
Dec29-11, 01:36 PM
P: 37
Inhomogeneous (poincare) lorentz transormation

Right! I knew it would have to have been something stupidly simple >.<

thanks guys.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Lorentz and Poincare Groups Special & General Relativity 23
Are Lorentz and Poincare insufficiently credited for special relativity? Special & General Relativity 2
Lorentz or Poincare invariant? Special & General Relativity 1
Poincaré's 1900 paper on Lorentz's theory Special & General Relativity 13
Lorentz and Poincare groups Special & General Relativity 1