Undergrad Lorentz transformation validity

Click For Summary
The Lorentz transformation is valid when the origins of the reference frames coincide at t=t'=0, but it can be applied in various coordinate systems based on convenience. The discussion emphasizes that while the standard configuration simplifies calculations, it is not the only option. Lines parallel to the axes in spacetime graphs represent constant values of time and space, which is a fundamental aspect of how coordinates are defined. The choice of reference events ensures that the coordinates equal (0, 0, 0, 0) across different systems, maintaining consistency in transformations. In curved spacetime, Lorentz transformations remain applicable locally, provided the region is small enough to approximate flatness.
Pushoam
Messages
961
Reaction score
53
Is the Lorentz transformation given by the equations
lt.png

valid only if the origin of S and S' coincides at t=t'= 0 and the other axis (x,y,z) remains parallel to (x',y',z') respectively?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, that is sometimes called the standard configuration.
 
  • Like
Likes Pushoam
Dale said:
Yes, that is sometimes called the standard configuration.
But you can choose whatever coordinate system you want, right? So why complicate things?
 
mi.png
r
Why do we draw parallel to the axes?
What does ensure that reading off the intercepts this way gives the space and time coordinates?
 
Battlemage! said:
But you can choose whatever coordinate system you want, right? So why complicate things?
You could also choose the original frame for your coordinates. What coordinate system you pick is a matter of convenience. It is not always convenient to use the standard configuration.

Lorentz transformations include rotations and boosts. If you want to include translations in time and space, then you are talking Poincare transformations. If you want a completely arbitrary coordinate system, you are talking general coordinate transformations.
Pushoam said:
View attachment 205378r
Why do we draw parallel to the axes?
What does ensure that reading off the intercepts this way gives the space and time coordinates?
This is the definition of those coordinates.
 
  • Like
Likes Battlemage! and Pushoam
Pushoam said:
View attachment 205378r
Why do we draw parallel to the axes?
What does ensure that reading off the intercepts this way gives the space and time coordinates?
This is the same thing we do with an ordinary x-y position graph. Are you asking why an x-t (spacetime) graph works the same way, or are you asking why all graphs work this way?
 
  • Like
Likes robphy
jtbell said:
are you asking why all graphs work this way?
 
Pushoam said:
View attachment 205378r
Why do we draw parallel to the axes?

A line parallel to the x-axis is a line of constant t.
A line parallel to the t-axis is a line of constant x.

What does ensure that reading off the intercepts this way gives the space and time coordinates?

If a line parallel to the x-axis is a line of constant t, then that line passes through the t-axis at the value of t where x is zero.
If a line parallel to the t-axis is a line of constant x, then that line passes through the x-axis at the value of x when t is zero.

As the others have pointed out, this is the way we define things when we create graphs. It's what they mean, by definition. These points on the axes are called intercepts.
 
  • Like
Likes Pushoam
Battlemage! said:
But you can choose whatever coordinate system you want, right? So why complicate things?

If I understand the discussion correctly, this is not an issue of the choice of coordinate systems. Rather it's the choice of a reference event such that the values of the coordinates equal (0, 0, 0, 0) in all coordinate systems for that event.
 
  • #10
Mister T said:
If I understand the discussion correctly, this is not an issue of the choice of coordinate systems. Rather it's the choice of a reference event such that the values of the coordinates equal (0, 0, 0, 0) in all coordinate systems for that event.
But that doesn't work in curved spacetime, correct? Because inertial frames are local? Or does it work anyway since all zero's all transform to all zero's?
 
  • #11
Battlemage! said:
But that doesn't work in curved spacetime, correct? Because inertial frames are local? Or does it work anyway since all zero's all transform to all zero's?

It works in curved spacetime too, but only in the region of spacetime around the event that is is small enough to be treated as flat - outside of that region the Lorentz transformations don't work at all.

The word "since" above has things a bit backwards though. Things aren't working out because all zeroes transforms to all zeroes; instead all zeroes transforms to all zeroes because it has to. You've decided to label the same event (0,0,0,0) in both coordinate systems so unless there's a mistake somewhere the transformation between the two coordinate systems has to take (0,0,0,0) in one to (0,0,0,0) in the other because that's what a transformation does. This will be true in flat and curved spacetime, with inertial and non-inertial coordinates.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 101 ·
4
Replies
101
Views
7K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K