Inhomogeneous (poincare) lorentz transormation

  • Thread starter Thread starter spacelike
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lorentz Poincare
spacelike
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
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:
x^{\prime\mu}=x^{\nu}\Lambda^{\mu}_{\nu}+C^{\mu}
where it is required that \Lambda^{\mu}_{\nu} satisfy the following relation:
\eta_{\mu\nu}\Lambda^{\mu}_{\alpha}\Lambda^{\nu}_{\beta}=\eta_{\alpha\beta}
(note: I found the same thing on wikipedia, so you can see it in context if you like. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_transformation#Spacetime_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 \mu and \nu in the above relation right? and we do this for all \alpha and \beta in order to satisfy all the components of the matrices.
My problem is what happens when we get to the following situation?:
\mu=0, \nu=1, \alpha=0, \beta=0
But, \eta_{01}=0, and \eta_{00}=-1. So there is no possible values of the \Lambda's that will satisfy this because we now have 0=-1, which is a contradiction.

Where did I go wrong with my thinking? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In an inertial coordinate system,
\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}
 
You're not summing, you've just assumed 4 values for the 4 variables. Remember you have to sum over mu and nu.
 
Right! I knew it would have to have been something stupidly simple >.<

thanks guys.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
Back
Top