Finite Lorentz Transformation via Poisson Bracket

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion focuses on the application of Lorentz transformations within the framework of Hamiltonian mechanics, specifically examining the challenges of defining finite Lorentz transformations using Poisson brackets. Participants explore the implications of using velocity versus rapidity as parameters in these transformations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant defines the operator for Lorentz boosts in the x-direction and expresses confusion about how the operator yields the correct transformations, noting issues with time dependence and spatial coordinates.
  • Another participant suggests that the Hamiltonian formalism may struggle with time transformations and references the Lagrangian formulation and Noether's theorem as providing conserved quantities relevant to the discussion.
  • A different participant proposes that canonical transformations can be generalized to include time, indicating that a generating function could yield Lorentz transformations, but expresses difficulty in finding a suitable treatment for exponentiation of the infinitesimal generator.
  • One participant concludes that using velocity as a parameter in the exponential operator is flawed due to the non-additivity of velocities in special relativity, advocating for the use of rapidity instead and presenting a new definition for the Lorentz transformation operator.
  • The same participant claims that while the transformation of energy and momentum appears to align with expectations, the transformation of position does not conform to the anticipated behavior of Lorentz boosts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriateness of using velocity versus rapidity in defining Lorentz transformations, with some agreeing on the limitations of the Hamiltonian approach while others explore alternative formulations. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the correct formulation of Lorentz transformations.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the treatment of Lorentz transformations may depend on the definitions used and the assumptions made about the parameters involved, particularly regarding the non-additivity of velocities and the role of time in transformations.

andresB
Messages
627
Reaction score
375
TL;DR
I've been unable to generate a Lorentz Transformation via finite canonical transformation
Let me define ##L_{x;v}## as the operator that produce a Lorentz boost in the ##x##-direction with a speed of ##v##. This operator acts on the components of the 4-position as follows
$$L_{x;v}(x) =\gamma_{v}(x-vt),$$
$$L_{x;v}(y) =y,$$
$$L_{x;v}(z) =z,$$
$$L_{x;v}(t) =\gamma_{v}(t-vx),$$
where ##\gamma_{v}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-v^{2}}}##. Now, the infinitesimal generator of the Lorentz boost in the ##x##-direction is ##K_{x}=Hx-tP_{x}##, where ##H=\sqrt{p^{2}+m^{2}}##. A finite Lorentz transformation should be given via the exponential operator
$$L_{x;v}=\exp\left[\left\{ \circ,K_{x}\right\} \right]=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\frac{1}{n!}\left\{ \circ,K_{x}\right\} ^{n}$$
But I can't see how this operator gives the correct Lorentz transformations.
For the ##x## coordinate we have that ##\left\{ x,K_{x}\right\} =x\frac{p_{x}}{H}-t##, hence, the term ##\left\{ \left\{ x,K_{x}\right\} ,K_{x}\right\}## will be independent of time. So the term ##\gamma_{v}vt## will not appear.
Worse yet, ##K_{x}## generates a change in the ##y## coordinate ##\left\{ y,K_{x}\right\} =x\frac{p_{y}}{H}\neq0##, in contradiction of what a Lorentz transformation should do.

My take is that the usual tools of Hamiltonian mechanics are unable to do the right answer since in this case we have a transformation that also change the time.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's maybe difficult in the Hamiltonian formalism, because it involves the transformation of time. Within the Lagrangian formulation, the Noether theorem for the Poincare group leads to the conserved quantities ##p^0=E/c##, ##\vec{p}## (temporal and spatial translations) and the angular-momentum-tensor ##J^{\mu \nu}=x^{\mu} p^{\nu}-x^{\nu} p^{\mu}##. The space-space components are the usual angular-momentum and ##J^{\mu 0}=E x^{\nu}-p^{\nu} c t## is the said conserved quantity due to rotation-free boosts.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi
It seems, indeed, that the usual treatment is doomed to fail, and what is needed is a generalization of canonical transformation that includes time.

The concept of canonical transformation can be extended to include transformation in time once the phase space is extended, and there a generating function can be given that results in a Lorentz transformation.
https://aapt.scitation.org/doi/10.1119/1.16086
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0305-4470/38/6/006

However, I've been unable to find a treatment in terms of exponentiation of the infinitesimal generator of the Lorentz boost. It would be weird that all others space-time transformation can be obtained with an exponential operator but not Lorentz boosts.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: MisterX and vanhees71
Ok, the endeavour was doomed to fail since it was badly formulated from the the beginning. The reason is that the in special relativity the velocity is not additive, so it is not a good parameter to use in the exponential operator. Indeed, the exponential with the velocity do not form a one-parameter group
$$L_{x;v_{1}}L_{x;v_{2}}\neq L_{x;v_{1}+v_{2}}.$$

The right way to do it is to use the rapidity ##s=\tanh v##, and make the definition
$$L_{x;s}=\exp\left[s\left\{ ,K_{x}\right\} \right]=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\frac{s^{n}}{n!}\left\{ \circ,K_{x}\right\} ^{n}.$$

With the above definition, the quantities ##\left(H,\mathbf{p}\right)## seem to transform as the components of a 4-vector
$$L_{x;s}(H)=H\cosh s-p_{x}\sinh s,$$
$$L_{x;s}(p_{x})=p_{x}\cosh s-H\sinh s,$$
$$L_{x;s}(p_{y})=p_{y},$$
$$L_{x;s}(p_{z})=p_{z}.$$
Moreover, the components of the velocity ##V_{i}=\frac{p_{i}}{H}## seems to transform as expected from Einstein addition formula.The position ##\mathbf{r}##, however, still is not transforming as expected from a Loretnz boost.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 101 ·
4
Replies
101
Views
7K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K