I Lorentz Transformation Matrix: Tensor of Order 2?

Ben Geoffrey
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Is the Lorentz transformation matrix Λμν a tensor of order two and does it transform like a tensor ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ben Geoffrey said:
Is the Lorentz transformation matrix Λμν a tensor of order two and does it transform like a tensor ?

Yes, but it's a little subtle. A transformation matrix simultaneously has two different interpretations:

  1. As a "passive" transformation: If you have a vector V and its components in one coordinate system are V^\mu, then its components in a second coordinate system (related to the first through a Lorentz transformation) will be given by: V^\nu = \sum_\mu \Lambda_\mu^\nu V^\mu.
  2. As an "active" transformation: If V is one vector, then we can defined a second, boosted vector V' via: (V')^\nu = \sum_\mu \Lambda_\mu^\nu V^\mu.
The distinction is a little subtle: In the first case, you have the same vector described in two different coordinate systems, and in the second case, you two different vectors described in the same coordinate system.

Viewed as an active transformation, \Lambda_\mu^\nu is a tensor.
 
Thank you for that. I have another question. If its a tensor then can we say its written in covariant formulation ? Is there anything like a GTR formulation of STR ?
 
Sir my question is more along the lines of we write GTR in tensor notation right ? so if we write Lorentz transformation matrix in tensor notation does it mean we've combined STR and GTR and written it as one theory ?
 
Ben Geoffrey said:
Is there anything like a GTR formulation of STR ?

Ben Geoffrey said:
if we write Lorentz transformation matrix in tensor notation does it mean we've combined STR and GTR and written it as one theory ?

STR and GTR are one theory. STR is just the special case of GTR for which spacetime is flat. This is true regardless of what notation you use. You can do GTR without using tensor notation (though it's a lot more tedious).
 
Ben Geoffrey said:
Sir my question is more along the lines of we write GTR in tensor notation right ? so if we write Lorentz transformation matrix in tensor notation does it mean we've combined STR and GTR and written it as one theory ?

You can formulate any theory of physics (including Newtonian physics) as a tensor theory, as far as I know. You don't really change the theory when you change the mathematical formulation. SR in tensor notation is still SR.
 
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