I Lorentz Transformation in One-Dimensional Space

the_emi_guy
Messages
766
Reaction score
79
If space only had one dimension would Einstein's speed of light postulate still lead to Lorentz transformation for motion along that one dimension?
Relativity of simultaneity can obviously be demonstrated in one dimension (lightning bolts hitting opposite ends of stationary and moving train). But all derivations of the Lorentz transformation seem to require at least a second space dimension (i.e. the familiar light clock and Einsteins original 1905 paper) in order to obtain the Lorentz factor. Also, description of light cone:
c2dt2=dx2+dy2+dz2 reduces to
cdt=dx so space-time intervals would no longer have the square roots of squares involved.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
the_emi_guy said:
But all derivations of the Lorentz transformation seem to require at least a second space dimension
It's easy to do a one-dimensional derivation; there's one by Einstein in the appendix of his book "Relativity: The special and general theory".

Basically we're looking for coordinate transformations such that ##x\pm{c}t=0## implies ##x'\pm{c}t'=0##, which is to say the speed of light is ##c## in both frames.
 
the_emi_guy said:
Also, description of light cone:
c2dt2=dx2+dy2+dz2 reduces to
cdt=dx so space-time intervals would no longer have the square roots of squares involved.
Yes it would. You are missing one root by asserting c dt = dx.
 
Thanks, this is what I was looking for.
 
Nugatory said:
It's easy to do a one-dimensional derivation; there's one by Einstein in the appendix of his book "Relativity: The special and general theory".

Basically we're looking for coordinate transformations such that ##x\pm{c}t=0## implies ##x'\pm{c}t'=0##, which is to say the speed of light is ##c## in both frames.
Then you are let even to a larger group of transformations, namely the whole conformel group!
 
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...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
Back
Top