Orthochronous subspace of Lorentz group.

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that the product of two orthochronous Lorentz matrices is also orthochronous. This involves exploring properties of the Lorentz group and the definitions related to orthochronous transformations.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the definition of orthochronous and its implications for the components of Lorentz matrices. There are attempts to apply the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and matrix multiplication properties to demonstrate the required proof.

Discussion Status

Several participants have offered insights and alternative approaches, with some questioning the application of inequalities and the relationships between matrix components. There is ongoing exploration of the necessary conditions for the 00 component of the product transformation.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of understanding the definitions and properties of Lorentz transformations, particularly regarding the orthogonality and the constraints on the components of the matrices involved.

LayMuon
Messages
149
Reaction score
1
In a Lorentz group we say there is a proper orthochronous subspace. How can I prove that the product of two orthchronous Lorentz matrices is orthochronous? Thanks. Would appreciate clear proofs.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sounds like homework...

As a start, what is your definition of orthochronous?
 
\Lambda^0_0 \geq 1
 
LayMuon said:
In a Lorentz group we say there is a proper orthochronous subspace. How can I prove that the product of two orthchronous Lorentz matrices is orthochronous? Thanks. Would appreciate clear proofs.

Consider two such matrices, A and B, call their product C. Now take the (0,0) entries of the following matrix equations
A B = C , \ \ \ A \ \eta \ A^{ T } = B^{ T } \eta \ B = \eta .
Now, if you use the Schwarz inequality
<br /> - \sqrt{ ( A^{ 0 }{}_{ i } )^{ 2 } ( B^{ i }{}_{ 0 } )^{ 2 } } \leq A^{ 0 }{}_{ i } \ B^{ i }{}_{ 0 } ,<br />
and
A^{ 0 }{}_{ 0 } \geq 1 , \ \ B^{ 0 }{}_{ 0 } \geq 1 ,
you should be able to show that C^{ 0 }{}_{ 0 } \geq 1
 
Thanks for reply. Why is there a minus sign in Schwartz inequality? Isn't it \sqrt{ ( A^{ 0 }{}_{ i } )^{ 2 } ( B^{ i }{}_{ 0 } )^{ 2 } } \geq |A^{ 0 }{}_{ i } \ B^{ i }{}_{ 0 }|?

<br /> <br /> C^0 {}_0 - A^0 {}_0 B^0 {}_0 = A^{ 0 }{}_{ i } \ B^{ i }{}_{ 0 }<br /> <br />

How to proceed?
 
I don't (yet) see what Sam is doing there. But what you wrote isn't the standard Cauchy-Schwarz inequality either. I think what you're looking for is
$$\left|\sum_i A^0{}_i B^i{}_0\right|\leq \sqrt{\sum_i(A^0{}_i)^2}\sqrt{\sum_j(B^j{}_0)^2}.$$ Do you know how to prove that if ##\Lambda## is orthochronous, its 00 component is either ##\geq 1## or ##\leq -1##? If you have proved that, it will be sufficient to prove that the 00 component of the product transformation is ##\geq 0##. I think that makes the problem much easier. One approach is to try to show that (in a notation with all indices of matrix components written downstairs) ##(\bar\Lambda\Lambda)_{00}=\bar\Lambda_{00} \Lambda_{00} X,## where X is a non-negative real number.
 
Last edited:
So how does it work out?
 
Have you tried this approach? (I have, so I know that it works). What do you get?
 
Moved to homework since it is a homework type question.

LayMuon said:
So how does it work out?

Please provide an attempt at the solution.
 
  • #10
|C^0 {}_0 - A^0 {}_0 B^0 {}_0 | \leq \sqrt{\sum_i(1-B^0{}_0{}^2)}\sqrt{\sum_j(A^0{}_i)^2}. I don't know how to express $$ A^0{}_i^2$$ in terms of A00
 
Last edited:
  • #11
I don't see what you're doing there.

I worked through the solution by my method again. I had to use Cauchy-Schwartz, the familiar version for vectors on ##\mathbb R^3##, but not until the very end.

You didn't answer if you have already proved that the 00 component of a Lorentz transformation can't be in the interval (-1,1). You should start with that, because it makes your task easier. You will find that result if you look at the 00 component of the matrix equation ##\Lambda^T\eta\Lambda=\eta##. (Use the definition of matrix multiplication). The next step is to use the definition of matrix multiplication on the 00 component of ##\bar\Lambda\Lambda##. Feel free to use the notation AB instead of ##\bar\Lambda\Lambda## if you prefer.
 
  • #12
Fredrik said:
You didn't answer if you have already proved that the 00 component of a Lorentz transformation can't be in the interval (-1,1).

Yes, that's clear.
 
  • #13
OK, I should also mention that I find it useful to know that if ##\Lambda## is the transformation from the coordinate system S to the coordinate system S', then (in my notation, where all matrix indices are downstairs), ##\Lambda_{i0}/\Lambda_{00}## is the velocity of S in S'. It's not absolutely necessary to know that, but it makes some steps easier to see.
 
  • #14
LayMuon said:
Thanks for reply. Why is there a minus sign in Schwartz inequality? Isn't it \sqrt{ ( A^{ 0 }{}_{ i } )^{ 2 } ( B^{ i }{}_{ 0 } )^{ 2 } } \geq |A^{ 0 }{}_{ i } \ B^{ i }{}_{ 0 }|?
Ok, doesn’t this imply that
- \sqrt{ ( A^{ 0 }{}_{ i } )^{ 2 } ( B^{ j }{}_{ 0 } )^{ 2 } } \leq A^{ 0 }{}_{ i } \ B^{ i }{}_{ 0 } .

<br /> <br /> C^0 {}_0 - A^0 {}_0 B^0 {}_0 = A^{ 0 }{}_{ i } \ B^{ i }{}_{ 0 }<br /> <br />

How to proceed?

Now, from the other two equations, you have (sums over indices are implies)
( A^{ 0 }{}_{ i } )^{ 2 } = ( A^{ 0 }{}_{ 0 } )^{ 2 } - 1 ,
( B^{ j }{}_{ 0 } )^{ 2 } = ( B^{ 0 }{}_{ 0 } )^{ 2 } - 1 .
Using these, the Schwarz inequality becomes equivalent to
0 \leq | A^{ 0 }{}_{ 0 } | \ | B^{ 0 }{}_{ 0 } | \left( 1 - \sqrt{ ( 1 - | A^{ 0 }{}_{ 0 } |^{ - 2 } ) ( 1 - | B^{ 0 }{}_{ 0 } |^{ - 2 } ) } \right) \leq C^{ 0 }{}_{ 0 } .
Now you can check that C^{ 0 }{}_{ 0 } \geq 1.
 
  • #15
How did you get this: ( A^{ 0 }{}_{ i } )^{ 2 } = ( A^{ 0 }{}_{ 0 } )^{ 2 } - 1? I understand it for B. how are A^0{}_j and A^j{}_0 related?
 
  • #16
Lower indices number the rows in the matrix. Choose any convention you like and stick with it.
 
  • #17
samalkhaiat said:
Lower indices number the rows in the matrix. Choose any convention you like and stick with it.

I still don't understand. They are different parts of lorentz matrix. One can only use the definition of lorentz group, I.e. orthogonality.
 
  • #18
LayMuon said:
I still don't understand. They are different parts of lorentz matrix. One can only use the definition of lorentz group, I.e. orthogonality.

I don't really do homework. Any way, orthogonality is what I used in writing the matrix equations
\eta = A \eta A^{ T }, \ \ \eta = B^{ T } \eta B
Now, forget about upper and lower indices, Can you find the first matrix element, i.e. the (0,0) entry in each of the above equations?
 
  • #19
LayMuon said:
Thanks for reply. Why is there a minus sign in Schwartz inequality? Isn't it \sqrt{ ( A^{ 0 }{}_{ i } )^{ 2 } ( B^{ i }{}_{ 0 } )^{ 2 } } \geq |A^{ 0 }{}_{ i } \ B^{ i }{}_{ 0 }|?
OK, I see now that I got confused by the notation. The inequality that samalkhaiat wrote down is an almost immediate consequence of Cauchy-Schwartz for vectors in ##\mathbb R^3##. If we use your inequality from the quote above, and then use that ##|x|\geq -x## for all real numbers x,...

Regarding notational conventions: Some people would write ##x_i x_i## rather than ##(x_i)^2## to ensure that the index to be summed over explicitly appears twice, but I suppose that can be weird too when we use a convention that typically has one of the indices upstairs and the other downstairs. I would denote the component on row ##\mu##, column ##\nu## of an arbitrary matrix X by ##X_{\mu\nu}##, ##X^\mu_\nu## or ##X^\mu{}_\nu##. Samalkhaiat apparently uses ##X^\nu{}_\mu##. That's fine too. As he said, "choose any convention you like and stick with it".
 

Similar threads

Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K