Lorentz, waves, Einstein and bodies: transformations +/- gamma

ANvH
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
I am using a wikipedia page, Derivation of the Lorentz transformations and a lot of historical papers. To follow through I came up with my own transformations that do not contain the gamma factor:

##x^{'}=x-\beta ct##​
##t^{'}=t-\beta \frac{x}{c}##​

When applying them to a waveform

##\omega t^{'}-kx^{'}=(1+\beta)\omega t-(1+\beta)kx##​

The speed of the wave is then
##u=\frac{\omega}{k}\frac{1+\beta}{1+\beta}=c##​

So for a waveform the above transformations suffice given the speed of the Doppler shifted wave is equal to the non Doppler shifted wave. However, using the wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivations_of_the_Lorentz_transformations, the transformations need the gamma factor when I am following through with the above equations. For the waveform this will increase the Doppler shifts:

##\omega t^{'}-kx^{'}=\gamma (1+\beta)\omega t-\gamma(1+\beta)kx##​

The speed of the wave is then
##u=\frac{\omega}{k}\frac{\gamma(1+\beta)}{\gamma(1+\beta)}=c##​

I would conclude that the transformations without the gamma factor is sufficient to transform the waveform. The transformations with the gamma factor is apparently necessary when the waveform is not utilized to test the validity of the transformations, but comparing the above with the reasoning in Wikipedia seems to be confusing.

What am I thinking wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Note that the determinant of your transformation is not equal to 1.
 
Lacking the gamma, your transformation includes a scale transformation. It preserves null vectors but does not preserve the length of spacelike or timelike four-vectors. Especially it does not preserve the rest mass of a particle.
 
robphy said:
Note that the determinant of your transformation is not equal to 1.

Ok, the Lorentz transformation matrix

\begin{align}
A=\gamma\begin{pmatrix}1 & -\beta/c\\ -\beta c & 1\end{pmatrix}
\end{align}

gives a determinant

det##A=\gamma(1-\beta^{2})=\frac{(1-\beta)(1+\beta)}{\sqrt{(1-\beta)(1+\beta)}}=\sqrt{(1-\beta)(1+\beta)}##
that does not lead to unity either. Please enlighten.
 
det##A=\gamma^2(1-\beta^{2})##
 
Bill_K said:
det##A=\gamma^2(1-\beta^{2})##

gosh..., thanks.
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. The Relativator was sold by (as printed) Atomic Laboratories, Inc. 3086 Claremont Ave, Berkeley 5, California , which seems to be a division of Cenco Instruments (Central Scientific Company)... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/relativator-circular-slide-rule-simulated-with-desmos/ by @robphy
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...

Similar threads

Back
Top