General Generator of Lorentz Transformation in Hamiltonian Formalism

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion focuses on the general generator of Lorentz transformations within the Hamiltonian formalism, exploring the relationship between canonical transformations and Poisson brackets. Participants examine the forms of generators for Galilean and Lorentz boosts, questioning why certain simplified forms are commonly used in literature.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant introduces the concept that in Hamiltonian formalism, space-time transformations are realized via canonical transformations generated by Poisson brackets of phase-space variables.
  • Another participant proposes a generator for Lorentz transformations in the form of $$t\mathbf{p}-\frac{E}{c^2}\mathbf{r}$$, suggesting it relates to the angular momentum 4-tensor.
  • A similar point is reiterated by another participant, who notes that this proposed generator resembles the Galilean boost generator with mass replaced by energy.
  • One participant connects the discussion to the interpretation of energy-mass equivalence, suggesting that in relativistic physics, inertia is measured by energy rather than mass.
  • A later reply confirms that the proposed generator maintains the same bracket relations as the simpler form, expressing curiosity about the preference for the ##t=0## generator in literature.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying views on the forms of the generators and their implications, with no consensus reached on the preferred generator or its physical interpretation.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the simplification to the ##t=0## generator may obscure some physical interpretations of the boost generator, indicating a potential limitation in understanding the full implications of the transformations.

andresB
Messages
627
Reaction score
375
In the Hamiltonian formalism, the space-time transformation are realized via canonical transformation, and the transformations are generated by Poisson brackets of certain functions of phase-space variables.
In Newtonian mechanics, Galilean boosts are generated by the sometimes called dynamic mass moment $$\overrightarrow{G}=m\overrightarrow{r}-t\overrightarrow{p}.$$
Now, in virtually every source I consult, the general generator of the Galilean boosts is not considered. Instead, people just use the ##t=0## generator
$$\overrightarrow{G}=m\overrightarrow{r}$$
The same happen for Lorentz transformations, people just use the ##t=0## generator
$$\overrightarrow{K}=H\overrightarrow{r}$$
where ##H## is the energy.
So, the question is, what is the most general form of ##\overrightarrow{K}##?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How about
t\mathbf{p}-\frac{E}{c^2}\mathbf{r}
which comes from ##(M^{01},M^{02},M^{03})## of angular momentum 4-tensor
M^{\mu\nu}=x^\mu p^\nu-x^\nu p^\mu ?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
anuttarasammyak said:
How about
t\mathbf{p}-\frac{E}{c^2}\mathbf{r}
which comes from ##(M^{01},M^{02},M^{03})## of angular momentum 4-tensor
M^{\mu\nu}=x^\mu p^\nu-x^\nu p^\mu ?

So it would have almost the same form of the Galilei boost generator with only ##m## replaced by ##H##? I suppose it's a good Ansatz, I'll have to check the bracket relations of the Poincare group to see if they remain true.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Yes! The conclusion leads to the correct interpretation of the famous "energy-mass equivalence":

In Newtonian physics from invariance under Galilei boosts follows that the center of mass of a closed system moves with constant velocity. The measure for "inertia" is mass.

In relativistic physics invariance under Lorentz boosts implies that the center of energy of a closed system moves with constant velocity and thus the measure of inertia is energy.

Using the equivalence principle this implies that the source of a gravitational field must be energy, not mass, in relativistic physics.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: haushofer
So, yes, ##\mathbf{K}=H\mathbf{r}-t\mathbf{p}## has the same bracket relation than just ##\mathbf{K}=H\mathbf{r}##. Thank you guys for the answer. I do wonder why the ##t=0## generator is preferred for the presentation of the Galilean and the Poincare algebra, it seems to hide some physical interpretation of the boost generator, and it is not much of a simplification in the math.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 101 ·
4
Replies
101
Views
7K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K