Prove Lorentz Transformations: |E|>|cB| & Angle b/t E & B

LocationX
Messages
141
Reaction score
0
I need to show that:
1. if E is \perp to B in one Lorentz frame, it is \perp in all Lorentz frames
2. |E|>|cB| in L. frame, |E|>|cB| in all L. frame
3. Angle b/t E and B is acute/obtuse in L. frame, it is acute/obtuse in all L. frame
4. E is \perp to B but |E|\neq|cB|, then there is a frame which the field is purely electric or magnetic

Attempt:
1. I believe I just show that \bar{E} \cdot \bar{B} =E \cdot B
2. I believe I just show \bar{E}^2-c^2 \bar{B}^2 =E^2-B^2c^2 so that if |E|>|cB|, then \bar{E}^2-c^2 \bar{B}^2 is positive and thus E^2-B^2c^2 has to be positive, thus, |E|>|cB| in all frames.

Not too sure where to start for 3 and 4. Open to suggestions, also it would be great if someone could check my approach for 1 and 2. thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
LocationX said:
3. Angle b/t E and B is acute/obtuse in L. frame, it is acute/obtuse in all L. frame
4. E is \perp to B but |E|\neq|cB|, then there is a frame which the field is purely electric or magnetic

Hi LocationX! :smile:

Your answers to 1 and 2 seem fine. :smile:

3 should be similar to 1 … what is the sign of E.B if the angle between is acute?

4: I suggest you start with the simple case of |E| > c|B|, and B and E along the x-direction and y-direction respectively, and see what happens when you transform parallel to the x-direction. :smile:
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top