Proving Invariance of Physical Laws Under All Transformations

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on proving the invariance of physical laws, specifically the equation involving the momentum derivative and force, under all coordinate transformations. It highlights the necessity of using tensors and understanding their transformation properties to establish this invariance. The conversation points out that while many textbooks claim invariance, they often do not demonstrate it for all transformations. It emphasizes the importance of ensuring that objects like tensors, vectors, and scalars are correctly defined to maintain their properties under general coordinate transformations. The example of the Faraday tensor illustrates the need for modifications when transitioning from flat to curved spacetime to preserve its tensorial nature.
marmot
Messages
55
Reaction score
1
Hi. So if you have \frac{d p_{\alpha}}{ds} = \frac{q}{c} F^{\alpha \beta} u_{\beta} how could you possibly go on proving this its form is invariant under all coordinate transformations? Or any physical law of any form, really? I guess my point is how do you represent "all possible transformations", because a lot of textbooks go about how the form of a certain physical law is invariant but they never prove it for all possible transformations.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


You need some machinery about tensors and their transformation properties to prove this generally.
 


Everything there is either a tensor, a vector, or a scalar, so, of course it transforms properly. At least under Lorentz transformations, they do. If you have general coordinate transformations, you need to make sure your definitions for those objects are correct so that they are still vectors, scalars, and tensors. For example, the Faraday tensor, as defined on flat space will not be a tensor in a general curved space-time, you have to modify it a little (basically take partial derivatives go to covariant derivatives in the definition).
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top