Lorentz boost and equivalence with 3d hyperbolic rotations

chwie
Messages
59
Reaction score
0
I was thinking that if i have for example a boost in the direction of x, then the boost should be equivalent to an hyperbolic rotation of the y and z axes in the other direction. I don't know if it's true or not. Then I want to know if somebody knows this result or why is false?

I was thinking also that is possible to make an homomorphism between some subgroup of the space rotations by complex angle (six parameter group) and some subgroup of the Lorentz transform (six parameter group). Also i don't know if that homomorphism is possible and I'm too lazy like to try to do the proof it myself. If somebody knows why is impossible to make such homomorphism or if there is some theorem that proof this, please let me know. Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you talking about something like the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algebra_of_physical_space"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nope, that is the homomorphism between 2x2 unimodular matrix and the restricted Lorentz group, but thanks for the help.

Well i was myself trying to proof about the equivalence of the boost and the 3d hyperbolic rotations, but the problem is to find the hyperbolic rotation that leaves the magnitude of the z and y vector invariant, and can be done using imaginaries terms, but the physics is not equivalent, then i was wrong. I don't know why I thought was possible, in an 4D euclidean space is possible to do similar relations, but because of the pseudo-euclidean metric is not possible in this case.

Also about the Lorentz group isomorphism and the rotation with complex angle is another way to said the representation of the pseudo-orthogonal matrix in four dimension. Then that is the subgroup of the rotations with complex angle which is isomorphic with the Lorentz group. Which is the most common representation. I was hoping in finding a more general one, but was not possible.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...
Back
Top