Prove that s^2=(s')^2 using the Lorentz Transformation

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on proving the invariant quantity s^2 = x^2 - (ct)^2 using Lorentz transformations in special relativity. The user attempts to apply the transformations for x' and t' to derive s'^2 but encounters difficulties in simplifying the resulting equation. They express frustration over the complexity of the algebra involved and seek guidance on whether they are being impatient with the process. A response points out algebraic errors in their calculations, indicating that they need to revisit their steps for accuracy. The conversation highlights the challenges of applying mathematical concepts in the context of special relativity.
castrodisastro
Messages
82
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement

I am learning special relativity and we came across the invariant quantity s = x2 - (ct)2. Our professor wants us to prove it. I admit that this is a proof and belongs in the mathematics section but I didn't see an Algebra section and this is most easily identified by those learning special relativity.

The assignment simply states

"Prove s2 = s'2"


Homework Equations


s2= x2-(ct)2

\gamma=[1-(\frac{v}{c})2]-1/2

x' = \gamma(x-vt)

t' = \gamma(t-(vx/c2)

The Attempt at a Solution



My textbook is telling me in one sentence that if we apply the lorentz transformation to x and t then s2 = s'2...so I did that...

I choose to start with s'2 = x'2-(ct')2

Applying the lorentz transformation to x' and t' our equation becomes...

s'2 = (\gamma(x-vt))2-(c(\gamma(t-(vx/c2))2

Expanding what we have takes us to...

s'2 = (\gamma2(x2-2vt+(vt)2)-(c2\gamma2(t2)-2(v/c2)x+(v2/c4)x2))

If I combine some terms...

s'2 = \gamma2[x2(1-(v2/c4)+t2(v-1)+2v((x/c2)-t)]

From here I tried a couple of different things on scratch paper but I couldn't see particular direction that would simplify it all down. Am I just not being patient enough and not seeing that it gets worse before it gets better?

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
castrodisastro said:

Homework Statement

I am learning special relativity and we came across the invariant quantity s = x2 - (ct)2. Our professor wants us to prove it. I admit that this is a proof and belongs in the mathematics section but I didn't see an Algebra section and this is most easily identified by those learning special relativity.

The assignment simply states

"Prove s2 = s'2"


Homework Equations


s2= x2-(ct)2

\gamma=[1-(\frac{v}{c})2]-1/2

x' = \gamma(x-vt)

t' = \gamma(t-(vx/c2)

The Attempt at a Solution



My textbook is telling me in one sentence that if we apply the lorentz transformation to x and t then s2 = s'2...so I did that...

I choose to start with s'2 = x'2-(ct')2

Applying the lorentz transformation to x' and t' our equation becomes...

s'2 = (\gamma(x-vt))2-(c(\gamma(t-(vx/c2))2

Expanding what we have takes us to...

s'2 = (\gamma2(x2-2vt+(vt)2)-(c2\gamma2(t2)-2(v/c2)x+(v2/c4)x2))

If I combine some terms...

s'2 = \gamma2[x2(1-(v2/c4)+t2(v-1)+2v((x/c2)-t)]

From here I tried a couple of different things on scratch paper but I couldn't see particular direction that would simplify it all down. Am I just not being patient enough and not seeing that it gets worse before it gets better?

Thanks in advance.
You made a bunch of algebra errors. The last equation you had that was correct was: s'2 = x'2-(ct')2

Chet
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top