Is This a Lorentz Transformation in Special Relativity?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the analysis of coordinate transformations in special relativity, specifically examining whether sequential boosts in the x and y directions constitute a Lorentz transformation. The transformation matrices derived for the x and y boosts are confirmed to be Lorentz transformations, as they maintain the invariant interval ds². However, the resulting transformation matrices differ when the order of the boosts is reversed, indicating that the transformations are not equivalent. The relationship Lt(v) = L-1(-v) is highlighted, emphasizing the connection between the transformations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lorentz transformations in special relativity
  • Familiarity with the concepts of velocity boosts and invariant intervals
  • Knowledge of matrix operations and transformations
  • Proficiency in algebraic manipulation of equations in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of Lorentz transformations in detail
  • Explore the concept of velocity addition in special relativity
  • Investigate the implications of the invariant interval ds² in various transformations
  • Learn about the physical interpretations of sequential boosts in different inertial frames
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, particularly those focusing on special relativity, as well as educators and researchers interested in the mathematical foundations of Lorentz transformations and their applications in theoretical physics.

Libra82
Messages
13
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Question as stated: In special relativity consider the following coordinate transformation between inertial frames: first make a velocity boost v_x in the x-direction, then make a velocity boost v_y in the y-direction. 1) Is this a Lorentz transformation? 2) Find the matrix of this transformation. 3) Consider the boosts in inverse order - is it the same transformation?


Homework Equations


\beta_i = \frac{v_i}{c}
\gamma_i = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v_i^2}{c^2}}}


The Attempt at a Solution


I use the c = 1 convention.

I wrote down the two transformations as:

x-direction:
<br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> t&#039; \\<br /> x&#039;\\<br /> y&#039; \\<br /> z&#039;<br /> \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix}<br /> \gamma_x &amp; -\beta_x \gamma_x &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\<br /> -\beta_x \gamma_x &amp; \gamma_x &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 1 &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 1<br /> \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix}<br /> t\\<br /> x\\<br /> y\\<br /> z<br /> \end{pmatrix}<br />
and for the y-direction:
<br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> t&#039;&#039; \\<br /> x&#039;&#039;\\<br /> y&#039;&#039; \\<br /> z&#039;&#039;<br /> \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix}<br /> \gamma_y &amp; 0 &amp; -\beta_y \gamma_y &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 1 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\<br /> -\beta_y \gamma_y &amp; 0 &amp; \gamma_y &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 1<br /> \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix}<br /> t&#039; \\<br /> x&#039; \\<br /> y&#039; \\<br /> z&#039;<br /> \end{pmatrix}<br />
and combined these to get
<br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> t&#039;&#039; \\<br /> x&#039;&#039;\\<br /> y&#039;&#039; \\<br /> z&#039;&#039;<br /> \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix}<br /> \gamma_y &amp; 0 &amp; -\beta_y \gamma_y &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 1 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\<br /> -\beta_y \gamma_y &amp; 0 &amp; \gamma_y &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 1<br /> \end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}<br /> \gamma_x &amp; -\beta_x \gamma_x &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\<br /> -\beta_x \gamma_x &amp; \gamma_x &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 1 &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 1<br /> \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix}<br /> t\\<br /> x\\<br /> y\\<br /> z<br /> \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix}<br /> \gamma_x \gamma_y &amp; -\beta_x \gamma_x \gamma_y &amp; -\beta_y \gamma_y &amp; 0 \\<br /> -\beta_x \gamma_x &amp; \gamma_x &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\<br /> -\beta_y \gamma_x \gamma_y &amp; \beta_x \beta_y \gamma_x \gamma_y &amp; \gamma_y &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 1<br /> \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix}<br /> t\\<br /> x\\<br /> y\\<br /> z<br /> \end{pmatrix}<br />
This should be the answer to question 2).

If I inverse the order of the boosts I notice that the resulting transformation matrix is the transpose of the above matrix.

As the transformation matrix for the two cases in question are not equal the two transformations are not the same? (question 3)

I am uncertain on how to explain whether or not the resulting transformations are Lorentz transformations.

why do the question headlines automatically appear each time I preview my post?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
First of all, I am uncomfortable with the vy part of the question.
What is vy?
Is that the velocity of the K'' frame origin with respect to the initial K frame?
Or is that the velocity of the K'' frame with respect to the K' frame?
Clarifying this may help.

The resulting transformations are each Lorentz transformations.
There are many ways to prove that, depending on which starting point is assumed.
If the Lorentz transform is defined as a linear transformation that keeps the ds² invariant, then the proof is obvious.

A more algebraic would try to indentify the resulting transformation as a boost along a certain resultant velocity.

Finally, note also the relation Lt(v) = L-1(-v) .
The transformations are different, but nevertheless closely related.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: shaozq
Thank you for your reply.

I am, however, unsure of the interpretation of the vy part of the assignment. The exercise is written as in the OP. In my solution I have assumed vy was K'' with respect to K'.

Of course I could check whether or not ds² is invariant with respect to the double transformation! Thanks for the hint (and now I'm sad that I didn't figure this out for myself).

The final relation between the two is the same one I noticed while carrying out the calculations. Different transformations though as one matrix entry switches place.
 
You made a choice for the meaning of vy.
You simply need to keep that in mind.
Of course if you reverse the order of the boost, you need to switch the meanings too.
 
If you learned about velocity composition in SR, then you could make use of of this knowledge.
 

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K