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.
 
I asked a question here, probably over 15 years ago on entanglement and I appreciated the thoughtful answers I received back then. The intervening years haven't made me any more knowledgeable in physics, so forgive my naïveté ! If a have a piece of paper in an area of high gravity, lets say near a black hole, and I draw a triangle on this paper and 'measure' the angles of the triangle, will they add to 180 degrees? How about if I'm looking at this paper outside of the (reasonable)...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...

Similar threads

Back
Top