Lorentz's Derivation: A Historical Exploration

  • Thread starter Thread starter yogi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Derivation
yogi
Messages
1,523
Reaction score
10
I came across a paper recently that discussed the procedure Lorentz followed in his derivation, but it was incomplete. Does anyone have a reference that reproduces his steps - what got me wondering is how could Lorentz arrive at the same form as Einstein w/o impliedly introducing the postulate of one way constancy of light speed
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Lorentz derivation

yogi said:
I came across a paper recently that discussed the procedure Lorentz followed in his derivation, but it was incomplete. Does anyone have a reference that reproduces his steps - what got me wondering is how could Lorentz arrive at the same form as Einstein w/o impliedly introducing the postulate of one way constancy of light speed

I think a look at
David Bohm, The Special Theory of Relativity, (Routledge Classics 1996) will help.
 
Something to be found in Peter Bergmann, "Introduction to the Theory of Relativity," on page 45-46. Goes through various steps and the last one is:

"To the student, "Find out how moving clocks in the starred (moving through the either) system must be adjusted so a signal spreading in all directions from the starred point of orgin must be adjusted to have the apparent speed c in all directions."

The word "apparent" is important in that, since it was an "imaginary" system. Lorenz himself stated, "There existed for me only this one true time. I considered my time transformation only as a heuristic working hypothesis."
 
Last edited:
The Lorentz derivation DID assume a constant speed of light. BUT it only held for electromagnetic waves. It did not make the needed connection between the then known constant speed of light and the motion of massive bodies.

Do not forget that in the last half of the 19th century even the common man on the street was aware that light (electromagnetic radiation) behaved differently from massive objects. This disconnection was the major issue of Physics in that era. Kind'a like the space program of today, it was a popular topic of the media and was discussed by laymen.
 
I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
Thread 'Dirac's integral for the energy-momentum of the gravitational field'
See Dirac's brief treatment of the energy-momentum pseudo-tensor in the attached picture. Dirac is presumably integrating eq. (31.2) over the 4D "hypercylinder" defined by ##T_1 \le x^0 \le T_2## and ##\mathbf{|x|} \le R##, where ##R## is sufficiently large to include all the matter-energy fields in the system. Then \begin{align} 0 &= \int_V \left[ ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g}\, \right]_{,\nu} d^4 x = \int_{\partial V} ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g} \, dS_\nu \nonumber\\ &= \left(...
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...

Similar threads

Back
Top