4-Velocity and World Line Parameterization

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter pmr
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Line
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the concept of 4-velocity and the parameterization of world lines in the context of special relativity. Participants explore the definitions and implications of 4-velocity, proper time, and the challenges of parameterizing world lines, particularly in relation to momentarily co-moving reference frames (MCRF).

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes the derivation of 4-velocity from the differential segment of a world line and expresses confusion about the parameterization of world lines by proper time, suggesting it feels ephemeral and not globally persistent.
  • Another participant proposes that proper time can be viewed as a distance along the world line, allowing for the writing of coordinates as functions of proper time, thus enabling the evaluation of derivatives that yield 4-velocity.
  • A comparison is made to curves in Euclidean spaces, where parametrization by curve length is considered valid and invariant, suggesting a similar approach applies to world lines and proper time.
  • Concerns are raised about the definition of proper time, with one participant asserting that it is a world scalar independent of specific coordinates and can be calculated universally, while another participant questions the parameterization of world lines.
  • It is noted that world lines can be parameterized by different parameters, and the relationship between these parameters and proper time can be established through differentiation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of proper time and its role in parameterizing world lines. While some argue for its significance as a frame-independent scalar, others question the validity of parameterizing world lines by proper time, leading to an unresolved discussion.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the dependence of proper time on the choice of reference frame and the implications for parameterization. The discussion reflects a range of interpretations regarding the mathematical treatment of world lines and the physical significance of proper time.

pmr
Messages
30
Reaction score
4
I would like to think that I understand how 4-velocity is defined in special relativity. It makes sense to me that one takes a differential segment of the world line ##(dt, d\vec x)## and translates it into a frame in which its spatial component disappears, leaving only ##(d\tau, 0) = (dt/\gamma, 0)##, where ##d\tau## is referred to as the "proper time." One then divides the differential world line segment by the proper time, and the 4-velocity pops out:

<br /> \vec U = {1 \over d\tau}(dt, d\vec x) = {\gamma \over dt}(dt, d\vec x) = \gamma(1, \vec v)<br />

The magnitude of the 4-velocity is then frame invariant, massless particles can't have 4-velocities, etc..., etc...

What I don't understand is this: The 4-velocity involves the terms ##dt/d\tau##, ##dx/d\tau##, ##dy/d\tau##, ##dz/d\tau##. Now, these are derivatives. Every other time I've seen a derivative anywhere in calculus or physics it has been the case that the thing being differentiated is a function that can be parameterized by the specified variable. Yet in this case I can't make sense of the idea that the world line is parameterized the proper time ##\tau##. To begin with, the proper time for a given differential world line segment is only well defined in the momentarily co-moving reference frame (MCRF). Every differential world line segment will have a different MCRF, and this makes the proper time feel ephemeral, strange, and not globally persistent enough to parameterize the world line as a whole.

Could anyone help clear up my confusion here? Should I even be trying to think of the world lines as parameterized entities? And if not, then how can we possibly take the derivatives of an entity that isn't even a function (in the sense that functions are nothing if not "things which are parameterized").
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You can interpret ##\tau## as the distance along the world line (from some arbitrarily chosen zero point on the world line).

Now there's no problem writing ##x##, ##y##, ##z##, and ##t## as functions of ##\tau## and evaluating the derivatives that yield the four-velocity vector. Choosing a reference frame is equivalent to selecting specific functions of ##\tau## to define your coordinates, and a momentarily comoving inertial frame is one in which ##dx/d\tau##, ##dy/d\tau##, and ##dz/d\tau## are zero at the point of interest.

From this point of view, it's the coordinates ##x##, ##y##, ##z##, and ##t## that should feel ephemeral and not especially globally significant - they're just the result of a more or less arbitrary choice of functions mapping points on the world line to numbers. The proper time ##\tau##, on the other hand, has a real and frame-independent physical significance: it's the time recorded by a clock moving along the world line.

This perspective may feel a bit strange when you're still learning special relativity and concentrating on the coordinates that an observer naturally assigns to events - but it will serve you well when you get to general relativity where there are no global inertial frames.
 
Last edited:
Just to make a comparison to curves in Euclidean spaces, it is perfectly fine to parametrize such a curve by using the curve length (again from an arbitrary point on the curve). If I make a crooked path in the forest and tell you to follow the curve for 5 km, it will lead you to a specific point in the forest. It is also a parametrization that is invariant regardless of what coordinate system you put on top of the forest as a whole. Same thing with a world line and the proper time. If I have a world line and start from the (arbitrary) zero point and tell you to find the event on the world line such that a clock following the world line progresses an hour, then this is a specific event in space-time. Again the parametrization is independent of the coordinate system that we put on space time (e.g., what inertial frame we choose) as we will always end up at the same event.
 
What I don't understand is this: The 4-velocity involves the terms ##dt/d\tau##, ##dx/d\tau##, ##dy/d\tau##, ##dz/d\tau##. Now, these are derivatives. Every other time I've seen a derivative anywhere in calculus or physics it has been the case that the thing being differentiated is a function that can be parameterized by the specified variable. Yet in this case I can't make sense of the idea that the world line is parameterized the proper time ##\tau##. To begin with, the proper time for a given differential world line segment is only well defined in the momentarily co-moving reference frame (MCRF). Every differential world line segment will have a different MCRF, and this makes the proper time feel ephemeral, strange, and not globally persistent enough to parameterize the world line as a whole.

I'm not sure why you think this. The proper time is not only defined for all observers, but it's a world scalar, It's definition is ndependent of any specific coordinates, and the value of proper time between any two points on a worldline is something that is also an invariant, i.e. it's not only defined for all observers, but its value is independent of the choice of reference frame.

This is why one differentiate with respect to proper time rather than coordinate time, differentiation by a world scalar gives a result that's not tied to any specific coordinate system. It's often called a geometric object (the simplest sort of object, a scalar. The 4-velocity is another geomteric object.

To calculate the proper time in the flat space-time of SR, you just evaluate
##\sqrt{(c dt)^2 - dx^2 - dy^2 - dz^2}##

Of course, in the MCIRF, the calculation is simpler, because dx=dy=dz=0. This is not required to calculate the proper time, however, it's still a geometric world scalar that's defined for all observers when you use the full formula.


Could anyone help clear up my confusion here? Should I even be trying to think of the world lines as parameterized entities? And if not, then how can we possibly take the derivatives of an entity that isn't even a function (in the sense that functions are nothing if not "things which are parameterized").

Yes, the usual parameterization of a worldline used to compute 4-velocities is
##t(\tau), x(\tau), y(\tau), z(\tau)##

Sometimes you get a wordline parameerized by some other parameter than ##\tau##. Say it is, for example ##T##. Then you can take

##(c \, dt/dT, dx/dT, dy/T, dz/dT)## and multiply it by a scalar so it has the correct length. This scalar will be ##dT / d\tau## You can also use the fact that the "length" of the 4-velocity vector must have a magnitude of +1 or -1 depending on your sign conventions, rather than calculating ##dT / d\tau##.
 
pmr said:
What I don't understand is this: The 4-velocity involves the terms ##dt/d\tau##, ##dx/d\tau##, ##dy/d\tau##, ##dz/d\tau##. Now, these are derivatives. Every other time I've seen a derivative anywhere in calculus or physics it has been the case that the thing being differentiated is a function that can be parameterized by the specified variable.

I sort of understand why it seems strange to you, but mathematically speaking, if we have a way to associate a unique value of x to each value of \tau, then we implicitly have a way to view x as a function of \tau.

The more general notion is "parametrized path" which is not confined to discussions of relativity. Anytime you have some N-dimensional space, and you have a path, or curve, through that space, you can describe the path by giving N functions of a real-valued parameter s: x^j(s). What is s? It's completely arbitrary. Just pick a point along the path, and call that s=0. Then just let s increase smoothly and monotonically (meaning it always increases, and never decreases or remains the same) as you go along the path. Then with respect to that parameter, we can define a kind of "velocity":

v^i = \dfrac{dx^i}{ds}

However, even though you can parametrize a path by any parameter you like, the most convenient way is to let s be the distance along the path. I understand that it seems circular to think of x^i as a function of the distance s along the path, because you have to have a path first before you can figure out s. But mathematically, it doesn't matter whether you have the path first, and then calculate s. If there is exactly one value of x^i associated with each value of s, then you can view x^i as a function of s.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
6K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K