Covariance of the Wave Equation in Modern Physics: A Proof

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on demonstrating that the wave equation is not covariant under Galilean transformations using the function y=Asin(2pi(x/lambda - ft). Participants debate whether to apply the law to primed variables or to substitute and then verify satisfaction of the law. One contributor has attempted the problem but believes their results indicate the wave equation is satisfied under Galilean transformation, prompting a request for clarification on the formulas used. The key focus is on whether the transformed wave function and wave equation maintain their form under the transformation. The conversation highlights the complexities of proving covariance in wave equations within modern physics.
mike217
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Question: Show that the wave equation is in not covariant with respect to Gallilean transformations, given the function y=Asin(2pi(x/lambda - ft))

My main question is inorder to show the covariance of a law, should I apply the law on the primed variables and show that it is satisfied by applying a transformation, or should I make the substitution, apply the law, and then show it is satisfied.

Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Interesting problem.Reminds me of the days when "Lorentz covariance" was unknown to me.
Do you know the form of a Galilei transformation??If so,write y(x,t) in the 'primed' system.

Daniel.
 
Thanks for your reply Daniel.

I have worked on this problem, but the result that I am getting is that the wave equation under the Gallilean transformation is satisfied. Please view key steps of my solution in the attachement.
 

Attachments

  • 1.gif
    1.gif
    2.2 KB · Views: 543
  • 2.gif
    2.gif
    2.9 KB · Views: 480
  • 3.GIF
    3.GIF
    2.5 KB · Views: 511
I'm sorry,but i couldn't understand your formulas.
To show that the wave function (and hence the wave equation) is not invariant under the Group of Galilean transformations (is not Galilei covariant) means to see whether the transformed wavefunction:

WVFCT--------->GT (WVFCT)'

satisfies or not the transformed wave equation:

WVEQ--------->GT (WVEQ)'

Daniel.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top