How to intuitively think of translations and Galilean boosts commuting?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter binbagsss
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Galilean
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the intuitive understanding of how translations and Galilean boosts commute, particularly in the context of classical physics. Participants explore definitions, analogies, and implications of these transformations, examining both spatial translations and time translations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the relationship between translations and Galilean boosts can be understood through mathematical definitions, noting that addition commutes in certain contexts.
  • Others clarify that spatial translations must be specified for the initial statement to hold true, as Galilean boosts and time translations do not commute.
  • A participant emphasizes that intuition is built through problem-solving rather than relying on simple analogies.
  • One participant introduces the concept of the Bargmann algebra, indicating that boosts do not commute within this framework, and seeks clarification on its implications compared to the unextended Galilean group.
  • Several participants discuss the analogy of pressing an accelerator pedal in a car as a way to conceptualize boosts, while also addressing the limitations of this analogy, particularly regarding the distinction between inertial and non-inertial frames during acceleration.
  • There is a contention regarding the definition of a boost, with some arguing that it changes the inertial reference frame, while others assert that it is a transformation between different inertial frames.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the commutation of translations and boosts, particularly regarding the role of time translations. There is no consensus on the best analogy for understanding these concepts, and the discussion remains unresolved on several technical points.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the need for clearer definitions of terms like "boost" and "reference frame," as well as the unresolved nature of the implications of the Bargmann algebra in relation to the Galilean group.

binbagsss
Messages
1,291
Reaction score
12
how to think of translations and Galilean boosts commuting intuitively
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How fast something is going and in what direction doesn't depend on where you are.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dextercioby and FactChecker
Depends on your definition of intuitive, but if a translation is T(X) = X + A and a boost is B(X) = X + Vt, then TB(X) = BT(X) = X + Vt + A because addition commutes.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: weirdoguy and Ibix
Moderator's note: Thread moved to the Classical Physics forum since that is the proper context for discussion of Galilean boosts.
 
binbagsss said:
translations
Note that this has to mean spatial translations for your statement in the OP to be true. Galilean boosts and time translations do not commute.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: weirdoguy and FactChecker
One builds intuition by working through problems. There is no magic trick to it.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: nasu
Imagine yourself in a car. You press accelerator pedal (this is boost), then you wait for some time (=time translation). Obviously, after these two transformations you'll find yourself far from the place you've started from.

In reverse order: You wait for some time (=time translation), then you step on accelerator (=boost). You have not moved.

Conclusion: time translations and boosts do not commute.
Eugene.
 
  • Skeptical
Likes   Reactions: PeroK
meopemuk said:
press accelerator pedal (this is boost)

How?
 
  • #10
By definition, boost is a transformation that changes velocity of reference frame.

When I press accelerator pedal, velocity of my car changes. Then the inertial reference frame associated with me and my car experiences a boost.

Eugene.
 
  • Skeptical
Likes   Reactions: PeroK and weirdoguy
  • #11
meopemuk said:
By definition, boost is a transformation that changes velocity of reference frame.

When I press accelerator pedal, velocity of my car changes. Then the inertial reference frame associated with me and my car experiences a boost.

Eugene.
During the acceleration itself you're not experiencing what physicists would call a 'boost'. Inertial observers are connected by 'boosts'. During acceleration you're not an inertial observer.
 
  • #12
meopemuk said:
By definition, boost is a transformation that changes velocity of reference frame.

No, boost changes inertial reference frame to a different inertial one.
 
Last edited:
  • #13
weirdoguy said:
No, boost changes inertial reference frame to a different inertial one.
True, during acceleration I am not an inertial observer. But after I released the accelerator pedal, I move with a constant speed and I may regard myself as an inertial observer, which is boosted with respect to my previous state.

I agree that this is not a perfect analogy for boost, but not a bad one if we disregard the (short) time during which I am stepping on the gas pedal.

Perhaps, a better analogy would be to jump (mentally) to another car that passes nearby.

Eugene.
 
  • #14
haushofer said:
Actually, they don't commute in the Bargmann algebra :P See e.g.

https://arxiv.org/abs/1011.1145
From the abstract I see the Bargmann algebra is assoicated with the centrally extended Galilean algebra. Could you give, very briefly, implications of what this means compared to the question I asked which was on, what I assume can be referred to as the unextended Galilean group. thanks
 
  • #15
PeterDonis said:
Note that this has to mean spatial translations for your statement in the OP to be true. Galilean boosts and time translations do not commute.
ofc.
 
  • #16
meopemuk said:
True, during acceleration I am not an inertial observer. But after I released the accelerator pedal, I move with a constant speed and I may regard myself as an inertial observer, which is boosted with respect to my previous state.

I agree that this is not a perfect analogy for boost, but not a bad one if we disregard the (short) time during which I am stepping on the gas pedal.

Perhaps, a better analogy would be to jump (mentally) to another car that passes nearby.

Eugene.
A reference frame is not an object like a car that has a single trajectory. A boost is not a physical process like acceleration of an object. A boost is a mapping or transformation from one reference frame to another.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
430
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 146 ·
5
Replies
146
Views
11K
Replies
4
Views
3K