Arbitrariness in Special Relativity

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mathematical foundations and definitions of proper time in the context of Special Relativity. Participants explore the relationship between proper time, coordinate time, and the Lorentz transformations, questioning the derivation and assumptions behind the equation (d{\tau})^{2}=(dt)^{2}-(dx)^{2>.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the mathematical basis for the equation (d{\tau})^{2}=(dt)^{2}-(dx)^{2}, suggesting that it cannot be assumed without clear derivation.
  • Another participant asserts that this equation is a definition of proper time and cannot be derived.
  • A different viewpoint proposes that proper time can be understood through the relationship between coordinate time and proper time on synchronized clocks, leading to definitions in other frames via Lorentz transformations.
  • One participant offers a mathematical derivation involving the Lorentz transformation, showing how to arrive at the time dilation factor and the equation in question.
  • A participant expresses a feeling of inadequacy in understanding the concept, indicating personal uncertainty.
  • A later post reiterates the initial question about the mathematical basis for the equation, introducing the invariance of the Lorentz metric as a starting point for defining proper time.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether the equation for proper time can be derived or is simply a definition. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing perspectives presented.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the dependence on definitions and the assumptions involved in the derivation of proper time, but these aspects remain unresolved within the discussion.

planck42
Messages
82
Reaction score
0
In an online lecture on Special Relativity, the instructor asserts that in the space-time coordinate system, [tex](d{\tau})^{2}=(dt)^{2}-(dx)^{2}[/tex] with [tex]\tau[/tex] representing the proper time in a frame moving with velocity v, t representing a period of time measured from an inertial reference frame, and c being clearly treated as 1. It is known from the Lorentz transformations that x and t are related through hyperbolic angles, but surely this cannot be sufficient to assume that the proper time is as it is given. If there is no clear mathematical basis for [tex](d{\tau})^{2}=(dt)^{2}-(dx)^{2}[/tex], then how can it be possible to derive such an equation willy-nilly?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That is the definition of proper time. You don't derive definitions.
 
I think you can in a sense "derive" it from the fact that coordinate time in any frame is defined in terms of proper time on a network of clocks at rest in that frame at every possible position (synchronized according to the Einstein synchronization convention). If you know that the proper time interval between two events on the worldline of an inertial clock must match up with the coordinate time between those events in the frame where the clock is at rest (i.e. the frame where the two events have the same position coordinate), then the definition of proper time between these events in other frames follows from the Lorentz transformation.
 
Yes, you can see that simply by setting dx=0 in the above.
 
Willy-nilly derivation

The Lorentz transformation of the time coordinate:

[tex]t = \tau \cosh(\phi) - x \sinh(\phi)[/tex]

(where [itex]\phi = \tanh^{-1}(v)[/itex])

can be recast as:

[tex]t = \frac{\tau - vx}{\sqrt{1-v^2}}[/tex]

From this relation it is very easy to obtain the time dilation factor:

[tex]\frac{dt}{d\tau} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-v^2}}[/tex]

It follows that:

[tex]d\tau^2 = dt^2(1-v^2)[/tex]

and since v = dx/dt,

[tex]d\tau^2 = dt^2 -dx^2[/tex]
 
Last edited:
Clearly I didn't try hard enough to understand the concept.
 
planck42 said:
In an online lecture on Special Relativity, the instructor asserts that in the space-time coordinate system, [tex](d{\tau})^{2}=(dt)^{2}-(dx)^{2}[/tex] with [tex]\tau[/tex] representing the proper time in a frame moving with velocity v, t representing a period of time measured from an inertial reference frame, and c being clearly treated as 1. It is known from the Lorentz transformations that x and t are related through hyperbolic angles, but surely this cannot be sufficient to assume that the proper time is as it is given. If there is no clear mathematical basis for [tex](d{\tau})^{2}=(dt)^{2}-(dx)^{2}[/tex], then how can it be possible to derive such an equation willy-nilly?

Start with the invariance of the Lorentz metric:

[tex](d{\tau})^{2}-(d\zeta)^{2}=(dt)^{2}-(dx)^{2}[/tex]

In the proper frame , there is no motion, so [tex]d \zeta=0[/tex]

You get the definition of proper time:

[tex](d{\tau})^{2}-0=(dt)^{2}-(dx)^{2}[/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 76 ·
3
Replies
76
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K