Lorentz Transformation: Wave Equation vs. Interval Invariance

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jk22
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lorentz
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the derivation of the Lorentz transformation, specifically whether it should begin with the invariance of the wave equation or the invariance of the space-time interval. It is established that starting with the wave equation yields five equations, two of which are wave equations, while starting with the space-time interval results in three quadratic equations. Participants emphasize the importance of using peer-reviewed literature and textbooks rather than vague historical claims or Wikipedia as sources for understanding the derivation of Lorentz transformations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lorentz transformations
  • Familiarity with wave equations in physics
  • Knowledge of space-time interval concepts
  • Basic calculus, particularly the chain rule
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of Lorentz transformations from the invariance of the space-time interval
  • Explore peer-reviewed papers on the derivation of wave equations
  • Learn about the historical context of Lorentz transformations in physics
  • Investigate different axiomatic approaches to deriving Lorentz transformations
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of relativity, and anyone interested in the mathematical foundations of Lorentz transformations and wave equations.

jk22
Messages
732
Reaction score
25
To find the Lorentz transformation, should it start with the invariance of the wave-equation ?

If so, then it gives 5 equations, 2 of them being wave-equations again.

If however the invariance of the space-time interval is demanded only 3 quadratic equations come out.

Which way should be taken to start relativity ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't believe Lorentz started with either of these approaches. Further, can you provide more detail on what you mean by each alternative. The way I would do either approach, I do not get the number and type of equations you claim.
 
jk22 said:
To find the Lorentz transformation, should it start with the invariance of the wave-equation ?

If so, then it gives 5 equations, 2 of them being wave-equations again.

If however the invariance of the space-time interval is demanded only 3 quadratic equations come out.

Where are you getting this from? Can you give references?
 
I mean in formulas the first way were :

$$
\frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial x^2}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial t^2}=0\\=\frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial x'^2}\left[\left(\frac{\partial x'}{\partial x}\right)^2-\frac{1}{c^2}\left(\frac{\partial t'}{\partial t}\right)^2 \right]\\-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial t'^2}\left[-c^2\left(\frac{\partial t'}{\partial x}\right)^2+\left(\frac{\partial t'}{\partial t}\right)^2 \right]\\+2\frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial x'\partial t'}\left[\frac{\partial x'}{\partial x}\frac{\partial t'}{\partial x}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial x'}{\partial t}\frac{\partial t'}{\partial t}\right]\\+\frac{\partial f}{\partial x'}\left[\frac{\partial^2 x'}{\partial x^2}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2 x'}{\partial t^2}\right]\\+\frac{\partial f}{\partial t'}\left[\frac{\partial^2 t'}{\partial x^2}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2 t'}{\partial t^2}\right]
$$

as it can be seen the two last equations are wave equations for the change of coordinates.

For example the two last equation would imply :

$$
x'=ax+bt+f(x-ct)+g(x+ct)\\
t'=dx+et+h(x-ct)+k(x+ct)
$$

So is there any hope that the coordinate transformation would allow to know what happens at the speed of light in vacuum $c$, as it was questioned by Einstein at his epoch (I remember having read that but I could not find where again, because Lorentz transformation are diverging at that speed) ?
 
jk22 said:
I just start from vague laws claimed by physicists during history

"Vague laws" are not a good starting point. Also Wikipedia is not a good source, you need to be looking at textbooks or peer-reviewed papers that specifically talk about how the Lorentz transformations can be derived and from what axioms. Also that Wikipedia article is very long and I don't see anything in it that corresponds to the claims you made in your OP.

jk22 said:
I mean in formulas the first way were

Where are you getting all this from?
 
From the invariance of the wave-equation, by using the chain rule.
 
jk22 said:
From the invariance of the wave-equation, by using the chain rule.

In other words, you don't have five equations. You just have one. "Five equations" would mean five independent equations, none of which can be derived from any of the others.

You seem to have a fundamental confusion about how to count "equations" and what it means to "derive" the Lorentz transformations. Searching PF should turn up some good past discussions on this topic. I would strongly recommend checking them out and also looking at the literature on different ways of deriving the Lorentz transformations from particular sets of axioms. That way you will be able to start a new thread with a better basis for discussion.

In the meantime, this thread is closed.
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
870
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
977
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K