Lorentz Transformations: Why We Need the Same $\gamma$

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the necessity of using the same Lorentz factor, denoted as ##\gamma##, in the Lorentz transformations for two inertial reference frames moving relative to each other. Participants explore the implications of this requirement within the context of special relativity, addressing symmetry, simultaneity, and consistency in theoretical predictions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question why the same ##\gamma## is used in both Lorentz transformation equations, suggesting alternatives like using different ##\gamma'## for one of the equations.
  • Others propose that the symmetry of the situation necessitates the same ##\gamma##, implying that a justification based on symmetry is required.
  • One participant mentions the relativity of simultaneity as a key concept in understanding the differences in time measurements between the two frames.
  • Another point raised is that inverting the Lorentz transformation shows that the same ##\gamma## appears in the inverse transformation, reinforcing the argument for its consistency.
  • It is noted that substituting -v for v in the Lorentz transformations leads to the same ##\gamma##, indicating that it is independent of direction and only depends on relative speed.
  • One participant emphasizes the importance of self-consistency in the theory and the need for predictions to align with observations as reasons for using the same ##\gamma##.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity and implications of using the same ##\gamma##, with some supporting the idea based on symmetry and consistency, while others question it and suggest alternatives. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the justification for the same ##\gamma##.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference symmetry arguments and the relativity of simultaneity, but there are no explicit resolutions or consensus on the necessity of the same ##\gamma## across transformations.

LagrangeEuler
Messages
711
Reaction score
22
If we have motion of system ##S'## relative to system ##S## in direction of ##x,x'## axes, Lorentz transformation suppose that observers in the two system measure different times ##t## and ##t'##.
x'=\gamma(x-ut)
x=\gamma(x'+ut')
Why we need to use the same ##\gamma## in both relations? Why not
x'=\gamma'(x-ut)
x=\gamma(x'+ut')
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'd suggest looking up the derivation of the Lorentz transformations from symmetry considerations. I think there's a section on Wikipedia, and Palash Pal's article "Nothing but relativity" has another treatment.

Alternatively, the Lorentz transformations are the ones that work in this universe to the limits of our experimental knowledge - all the justification you need in science.
 
LagrangeEuler said:
If we have motion of system ##S'## relative to system ##S## in direction of ##x,x'## axes, Lorentz transformation suppose that observers in the two system measure different times ##t## and ##t'##.
x'=\gamma(x-ut)
x=\gamma(x'+ut')
Why we need to use the same ##\gamma## in both relations? Why not
x'=\gamma'(x-ut)
x=\gamma(x'+ut')

The gamma factors must be the same by symmetry. Can you prove or justify this yourself?
 
Ibix said:
I'd suggest looking up the derivation of the Lorentz transformations from symmetry considerations. I think there's a section on Wikipedia, and Palash Pal's article "Nothing but relativity" has another treatment.

Alternatively, the Lorentz transformations are the ones that work in this universe to the limits of our experimental knowledge - all the justification you need in science.

##\gamma## must be the same function of ##u## in both cases. A symmetry argument is needed, perhaps, for why ##u## is the same in both cases!
 
The argument is basically the relativity of simultaneity for the difference between t and t' mentioned by the OP, and Einstein's simultaneity convention(a galilean notion) for the symmetry of ##u ## from S to S' and back.
 
If you invert the Lorentz transformation, you will see that it is the same ##\gamma## in the inverse transformation.
 
By convention, the unprimed frame records the primed system moving at +v, and so the primed frame records the unprimed system moving at -v.

As Erland said above, you can just substitute -v for v in the LTs, and you'll find that the inverse LTs are attained. Gamma is found to be the same for the primed and unprimed frames.

As far as gamma itself goes, you could also just substitute -v for v into the gamma function, and you'll find that the same gamma function is attained. As such, gamma is not dependent on direction, only the relative speed.

Best Regards,
GrayGhost
 
LagrangeEuler said:
Why we need to use the same ##\gamma## in both relations?

I would say that there are two important reasons. One, we want the theory to be self-consistent, and two, we want the theory's predictions to match observation.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 101 ·
4
Replies
101
Views
7K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K