I Derivative operators in Galilean transformations

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the transformation of derivatives under Galilean transformations, specifically addressing a perceived contradiction in the equations presented. The confusion arises from misinterpreting the relationship between time and space coordinates during the transformation, particularly the distinction between total and partial derivatives. It is clarified that the Galilean transformation treats time and space as independent variables, leading to specific derivative relationships that must be adhered to. The algebraic manipulation leading to incorrect conclusions stems from treating certain variables as constants when they should not be. Understanding these nuances is crucial for correctly applying the transformation equations in non-relativistic contexts.
TomServo
Messages
281
Reaction score
9
TL;DR Summary
I'm confused about how the derivative with respect to time transforms under a Galilean transformation.
I'm studying how derivatives and partial derivatives transform under a Galilean transformation.

On this page:

http://www.physics.princeton.edu/~mcdonald/examples/wave_velocity.pdf

Equation (16) relies on ##\frac{\partial t'}{\partial x}=0## but ##\frac{\partial x'}{\partial t}=-v##

But this seems like a contradiction to me. If you swap primed/unprimed you get ##\frac{\partial t}{\partial x'}=0## but ##\frac{\partial x}{\partial t'}=v##, in which case you have ##x=vt+x_0## and ##t=t'=\frac{x-x_0}{v}##. Thus ##\frac{dt'}{dx}=\frac{\partial t'}{\partial x}=\frac{1}{v}##, in violation of Eq. (16).

So where have I gone wrong? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
##t## is not given by ##(x-x_0)/v##, that can be true only for a very particular world-line and that is not what you are considering, you are considering the transformation of coordinates. ##\partial x/\partial t’ = v## is a partial differential, not a total differential.
 
  • Like
Likes TomServo
The Galilei transformation reads
$$t'=t, \quad \vec{x}'=\vec{x}-\vec{v} t.$$
You consider ##t## and ##\vec{x}## as independent variables when it comes to (non-relativistic) field equations. Thus you have
$$\frac{\partial t'}{\partial t}=1, \quad \vec{\nabla} t'=0, \quad \partial_t \vec{x}'=-\vec{v}, \quad \vec{\nabla} \otimes \vec{x}=\hat{1}.$$
 
Orodruin said:
##t## is not given by ##(x-x_0)/v##, that can be true only for a very particular world-line and that is not what you are considering, you are considering the transformation of coordinates. ##\partial x/\partial t’ = v## is a partial differential, not a total differential.
Could you further explain what you mean here? I know what worldlines are, but it seems to me (just algebraically) that the ##t=\frac{x-x’}{v}## relation holds in general. After all, I’m just solving the transformation equation for t. I know this is wrong, but I’m trying to understand why the algebra leads me astray (or seems to).
 
And where I wrote ##x_0## originally I meant ##x’##.
 
Then you are treating x’ as a constant when differentiating with respect to x. That is incorrect. What is being kept constant when you take the partial with respect to x is t, not x’.
 
  • Like
Likes TomServo
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
I passed a motorcycle on the highway going the opposite direction. I know I was doing 125/km/h. I estimated that the frequency of his motor dropped by an entire octave, so that's a doubling of the wavelength. My intuition is telling me that's extremely unlikely. I can't actually calculate how fast he was going with just that information, can I? It seems to me, I have to know the absolute frequency of one of those tones, either shifted up or down or unshifted, yes? I tried to mimic the...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top