Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction

In summary, the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction hypothesis does contradict the classical motion of a rigid body in special relativity. However, there is no absolute definition of a "rigid body" in relativity, and the closest concept is Born rigidity, which requires zero expansion and shear in the congruence of worldlines describing the body. This is more restrictive than the classical definition of a rigid body and is only possible under certain conditions.
  • #1
Ritika
1
0
Does the lorentz fitzgerald contraction hypothesis contradicts the classical motion of rigid body?
I am not sure but i think it doesn't contradicts the classical motion of rigid body.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
There is no such thing as a classically rigid body in relativity. Google and search here for "Born rigidity" for more.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
  • #3
Nugatory said:
There is no such thing as a classically rigid body in relativity. Google and search here for "Born rigidity" for more.
Born rigidity only applies when proper acceleration is involved it has absolutely nothing to do with relative motion without proper acceleration.
 
  • #4
MeJennifer said:
Born rigidity only applies when proper acceleration is involved

This is not correct. It is perfectly possible to have a Born rigid geodesic congruence. The simplest example is a congruence of parallel inertial worldlines in Minkowski spacetime.
 
  • #5
PeterDonis said:
This is not correct. It is perfectly possible to have a Born rigid geodesic congruence. The simplest example is a congruence of parallel inertial worldlines in Minkowski spacetime.
Ok then, what is the difference between a Born rigid and a non Born rigid congruence of parallel intertial worldlines in Minkowski spacetime?

If there is no acceleration it is totally useless to talk about something being Born rigid.
 
  • #6
MeJennifer said:
what is the difference between a Born rigid and a non Born rigid congruence of parallel intertial worldlines in Minkowski spacetime?

The first one exists and the second one doesn't. Every congruence of parallel inertial worldlines in Minkowski spacetime is Born rigid.
 
  • #7
"Does the lorentz fitzgerald contraction hypothesis contradicts the classical motion of rigid body?"
The classical definition of a rigid body, that it retains its shape when moving, is contradicted by special relativity. An SR definition of a rigid body is that it retains its shape in its instantaneous rest system, even while moving. You could look at
arXiv:1105.3899.
 
  • #8
clem said:
"Does the lorentz fitzgerald contraction hypothesis contradicts the classical motion of rigid body?"
The classical definition of a rigid body, that it retains its shape when moving, is contradicted by special relativity. An SR definition of a rigid body is that it retains its shape in its instantaneous rest system, even while moving. You could look at
arXiv:1105.3899.
What is your definition of moving?

In SR there is no such thing as absolute movement, all movement is relative.
What is not relative is proper acceleration.
 
  • #9
clem said:
An SR definition of a rigid body is that it retains its shape in its instantaneous rest system, even while moving.

This isn't a good definition as it stands, since, as MeJennifer points out, "moving" has no absolute meaning in relativity.

In relativity, there is no such thing as a "rigid body" in the classical sense, because internal forces between different parts of an object are not instantaneous; they can only be transmitted at the speed of light. The best that can be done in relativity is Born rigidity. The technical definition of Born rigidity is that the congruence of worldlines that describes the body (one worldline for each point in the body) must have zero expansion and shear. Heuristically, this means the distances between different parts of the body are constant. However, the conditions under which this is even possible are quite restrictive, much more so than in Newtonian physics, because of the Herglotz-Noether theorem (which you can look up for more info).
 

What is Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction?

Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction, also known as Lorentz contraction or length contraction, is a phenomenon in which an object appears shorter in the direction of its motion when observed by an outside observer. This is a consequence of the theory of special relativity, which explains how the laws of physics behave at high speeds.

Who discovered Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction?

Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction was first proposed by Dutch physicist Hendrik Lorentz and independently by Irish physicist George Fitzgerald in the late 19th century. It was later incorporated into Albert Einstein's theory of special relativity.

How does Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction work?

Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction occurs when an object moves at a high velocity relative to an outside observer. According to the theory of special relativity, as an object approaches the speed of light, its length in the direction of its motion appears to shrink from the perspective of an outside observer. This is due to the fact that time and space are relative, and the perception of length is influenced by the relative motion between the observer and the object.

What is the formula for Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction?

The formula for Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction is L=L0/√(1-v^2/c^2), where L is the contracted length, L0 is the rest length of the object, v is the relative velocity, and c is the speed of light. This formula shows that as the velocity of an object approaches the speed of light, the contracted length approaches zero.

What are some real-world examples of Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction?

Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction is not just a theoretical concept, but it has been observed and confirmed in various experiments. One example is the muon experiment, where high-energy muons were observed to have a longer lifetime than expected due to their high speeds. This can be explained by Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction, as the muons appear shorter in the direction of their motion, allowing them to travel further before decaying. Other examples include the contraction of particle accelerators and the lengthening of time intervals in high-speed aircraft clocks.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
877
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
72
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
83
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
12
Views
812
Replies
17
Views
770
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
54
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
52
Views
3K
Back
Top