Field Transformations work forwards but not backwards?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the behavior of field transformations between different reference frames, specifically addressing whether these transformations are reversible. Participants explore the implications of using different transformation equations, particularly in the context of magnetic fields.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant claims to have correctly transformed fields from reference frame A to B but encounters discrepancies when attempting to reverse the transformation from B back to A.
  • Another participant suggests that the first participant must have made a mistake, asserting that field transformations should work both ways.
  • A third participant notes that the transformations being used are low speed approximations, which may not be exact and could explain the discrepancies observed.
  • The original poster acknowledges a misunderstanding regarding the use of Galilean transformation equations, which are based on the approximation v^2/c^2 = 0, and thanks others for their input.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is disagreement regarding the validity of the transformations used and whether they can be applied in both directions. The discussion remains unresolved as participants have differing views on the implications of using low speed approximations.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations related to the assumptions underlying the Galilean transformations and the conditions under which they are valid. There is also a lack of detailed calculations provided by the original poster, which complicates the analysis.

Physics_5
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
I got the right answer for this example problem going from reference frame A to B but when I use those fields to go back from B to A I don't get the same magnetic field I started with.

Do field transformations only work one way? Surely not? I don't see how forces could be the same if this were the case

Link to example problem: http://imgur.com/GCQeayW
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You must have made a mistake because the field transforms work both ways. Hard to help you though since you couldn't be bothered to tell us what calculations you've made so far...
 
After looking at the example you linked I realize that the transformations you're using are the the low speed approximations. These are not exact. That might explain any discrepancies you may have found. Hard to tell because, again, you did not give us much explanation about the problem you're confronted with.
 
Sorry for not posting calculations. I just read the next section and it addressed my concern. My reasoning was not wrong. The problem is that I was using the Galilean transformation equations, which I did not know we're based on the approximation v^2/c^2 = 0. Thanks everyone for helping.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
6K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K