I Lorentz Transformation Derivation: Assumptions Req'd?

Pencilvester
Messages
205
Reaction score
47
In deriving the Lorentz transformation, is it required to assume that the transformation to get from coordinate system ##\bf {x}## to ##\bf {x’}## should be the same as that to get from ##\bf {x’}## to ##\bf {x}## (with the simple correction of flipping the velocity)? If no, could someone direct me to a derivation that does not assume this a priori? I’m having trouble deriving it myself without this assumption. If yes, what is the basis for this assumption?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Consider what happens when you transform the coordinates of an event from the unprimed frame to the primed frame and then back again... that will be enough to justify this requirement.
 
  • Like
Likes Pencilvester
Pencilvester said:
is it required to assume that the transformation to get from coordinate system xx\bf {x} to x′x′\bf {x’} should be the same as that to get from x′x′\bf {x’} to xx\bf {x} (with the simple correction of flipping the velocity)?
That is a consequence of the first postulate.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and Pencilvester
Haha, duh. Thanks!
 
Dale said:
That is a consequence of the first postulate.
It is also required of the Galilean transformation.
 
Both the Poincare and the Galilei transformations can be derived from the 1st Newtonian postulate together with the assumption that time and space for any inertial observer are homogeneous (translation invariance in space and time) and that the space for any inertial observer is a 3D Euclidean affine space (implying that also rotations are a symmetry of space) and that the symmetry transformations of space and time together build a group. The "reciprocity property", i.e., that if an inertial frame ##\Sigma'## moves with velocity ##\vec{v}## wrt. to another inertial frame ##\Sigma## than ##\Sigma## moves with velocity ##-\vec{v}## relative to ##\Sigma'##, can be derived from these symmetry assumptions and needs not to be postulated. The analysis reveals that the only possible space-time models obeying these assumptions are either the Galilei-Newton spacetime or the Einstein-Minkowski spacetime of special relativity.
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
Back
Top