Field Transformations work forwards but not backwards?

AI Thread Summary
Field transformations can be complex, and while they should theoretically work both ways, discrepancies can arise due to the use of low-speed approximations like Galilean transformations. The original poster initially believed their calculations were correct when transforming fields from reference frame A to B but found inconsistencies when reversing the process. It was clarified that using the Galilean transformations, which assume v^2/c^2 = 0, can lead to errors in results. The discussion emphasizes the importance of using the correct transformation equations for accurate field calculations. Understanding these nuances is crucial for resolving issues in field transformations.
Physics_5
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
I got the right answer for this example problem going from reference frame A to B but when I use those fields to go back from B to A I don't get the same magnetic field I started with.

Do field transformations only work one way? Surely not? I don't see how forces could be the same if this were the case

Link to example problem: http://imgur.com/GCQeayW
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You must have made a mistake because the field transforms work both ways. Hard to help you though since you couldn't be bothered to tell us what calculations you've made so far...
 
After looking at the example you linked I realize that the transformations you're using are the the low speed approximations. These are not exact. That might explain any discrepancies you may have found. Hard to tell because, again, you did not give us much explanation about the problem you're confronted with.
 
Sorry for not posting calculations. I just read the next section and it addressed my concern. My reasoning was not wrong. The problem is that I was using the Galilean transformation equations, which I did not know we're based on the approximation v^2/c^2 = 0. Thanks everyone for helping.
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top