- #1
stevmg
- 696
- 3
kev -
From your prior post you brought in this URL: http://hubpages.com/hub/Minkowski-Diagram
which has this diagram (figure 3)
Using his v = 0.6c, how do you prove that the (1,1) is the same as the (2,2)
I can't make it happen.
Also, his Lorentz and Inverse Lorentz transformations are wrong. With the t and t' equations, he has his + and - inverted which will really mess one up if one tries to follow his logic.
Below is what he wrote:
Lorentz transformations* ...Inverse Lorentz transformations*
x' = (x-vt)/(1-v2/c2)1/2 ......x = (x'+vt')/(1-v2/c2)1/2
y' = y .........y = y'
z' = z......... z = z'
t' = (t + vx/c2)/ (1-v2/c2)1/2 ...t = (t' - vx'/c2)/ (1-v2/c2)1/2
This is what it should be:
Lorentz transformations* ...Inverse Lorentz transformations*
x' = (x-vt)/(1-v2/c2)1/2 ......x = (x'+vt')/(1-v2/c2)1/2
y' = y .........y = y'
z' = z......... z = z'
t' = (t - vx/c2)/ (1-v2/c2)1/2 ...t = (t' + vx'/c2)/ (1-v2/c2)1/2[/COLOR]
How do we get to him and inform him of this?
stevmg
From your prior post you brought in this URL: http://hubpages.com/hub/Minkowski-Diagram
which has this diagram (figure 3)
Using his v = 0.6c, how do you prove that the (1,1) is the same as the (2,2)
I can't make it happen.
Also, his Lorentz and Inverse Lorentz transformations are wrong. With the t and t' equations, he has his + and - inverted which will really mess one up if one tries to follow his logic.
Below is what he wrote:
Lorentz transformations* ...Inverse Lorentz transformations*
x' = (x-vt)/(1-v2/c2)1/2 ......x = (x'+vt')/(1-v2/c2)1/2
y' = y .........y = y'
z' = z......... z = z'
t' = (t + vx/c2)/ (1-v2/c2)1/2 ...t = (t' - vx'/c2)/ (1-v2/c2)1/2
This is what it should be:
Lorentz transformations* ...Inverse Lorentz transformations*
x' = (x-vt)/(1-v2/c2)1/2 ......x = (x'+vt')/(1-v2/c2)1/2
y' = y .........y = y'
z' = z......... z = z'
t' = (t - vx/c2)/ (1-v2/c2)1/2 ...t = (t' + vx'/c2)/ (1-v2/c2)1/2[/COLOR]
How do we get to him and inform him of this?
stevmg
Last edited: