Invariance of the Lorentz transform

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the invariance of the electromagnetic wave equation through the differential operator. Participants note that while the y and z terms are invariant, the x and t terms introduce an additional factor of 1/1-v^2/c^2. The use of a trial function f(t', x') is suggested for differentiation, employing the chain rule to derive the necessary relationships. The process involves taking second derivatives and managing cross terms effectively. Ultimately, the approach simplifies the derivation of the invariance of the wave equation.
tina21
Messages
14
Reaction score
2
Homework Statement
Prove the invariance of the electromagnetic wave equation by showing that the corresponding differential operator is an invariant.
Relevant Equations
d^2/dx^2+d^2/dy^2+d^2/dz^2-1/c^2d^2/dt^2 = d^2/dx^2+d^2/dy^2+d^2/dz^2-1/c^2d^2/dt^2
of course y and z terms are invariant but for the x and t terms I am getting an additional factor of 1/1-v^2/c^2
 
Physics news on Phys.org
tina21 said:
Homework Statement: Prove the invariance of the electromagnetic wave equation by showing that the corresponding differential operator is an invariant.
Homework Equations: d^2/dx^2+d^2/dy^2+d^2/dz^2-1/c^2d^2/dt^2 = d^2/dx^2+d^2/dy^2+d^2/dz^2-1/c^2d^2/dt^2

of course y and z terms are invariant but for the x and t terms I am getting an additional factor of 1/1-v^2/c^2
Can you use Latex to show what you got?

https://www.physicsforums.com/help/latexhelp/
 
I haven't used latex before. I hope these images are okay
 

Attachments

  • WhatsApp Image 2019-11-24 at 7.23.02 AM.jpeg
    WhatsApp Image 2019-11-24 at 7.23.02 AM.jpeg
    42.6 KB · Views: 164
  • WhatsApp Image 2019-11-24 at 7.23.16 AM.jpeg
    WhatsApp Image 2019-11-24 at 7.23.16 AM.jpeg
    24.8 KB · Views: 181
That doesn't look right. I prefer to differentiate a trial function. Imagine we have a function ##f(t', x')##, where ##t' = \gamma(t - vx/c^2), \ x' = \gamma(x - vt)##.

Now, we differentiate ##f## with respect to ##x## using the chain rule:

##\frac{\partial f}{\partial x} = \frac{\partial f}{\partial t'}\frac{\partial t'}{\partial x} + \frac{\partial f}{\partial x'}\frac{\partial x'}{\partial x} = \frac{\partial f}{\partial t'}(-\gamma v/c^2) + \frac{\partial f}{\partial x'}(\gamma)##

Now you need to take the second derivative of ##f## by repeating this process - and remember that you have to differentiate both terms using the chain rule, so you will get cross terms in ##\frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial t' \partial x'}##.

At the end, you can remove the trial function to leave, for example:

##\frac{\partial}{\partial x} = (-\gamma v/c^2)\frac{\partial }{\partial t'} + (\gamma)\frac{\partial}{\partial x'}##

That's what you get if you only wanted the first derivative.

Note that you can do the chain rule on differentials, but I prefer to have a function to differentiate, and then take the function away when I'm finished.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes tina21
yes, I tried doing it too. Made it a whole lot easier and I got the answer. Thanks so much !
 
The book claims the answer is that all the magnitudes are the same because "the gravitational force on the penguin is the same". I'm having trouble understanding this. I thought the buoyant force was equal to the weight of the fluid displaced. Weight depends on mass which depends on density. Therefore, due to the differing densities the buoyant force will be different in each case? Is this incorrect?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
802
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
2K