Question about applying the Lorentz Transformation to velocity 4-vectors

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on the application of the Lorentz Transformation to velocity 4-vectors, specifically the matrix representation and its implications. The user successfully derives the velocity addition formula using the position and energy-momentum 4-vectors but struggles with the velocity 4-vector, indicating a fundamental misunderstanding. Key points include the transformation of the velocity 4-vector, the need for re-normalization, and the invariance of the speed of light. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the matrix representation of the Lorentz Transformation in deriving physical laws.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lorentz Transformation matrices
  • Familiarity with 4-vectors in special relativity
  • Knowledge of energy-momentum 4-vectors
  • Basic algebraic manipulation of matrices
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the velocity addition formula using Lorentz Transformation matrices
  • Learn about the properties of eigenvalues and eigenvectors in the context of Lorentz transformations
  • Investigate the concept of re-normalization in 4-vectors
  • Explore the implications of the invariance of the speed of light in different reference frames
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in physics, particularly those studying special relativity, as well as educators seeking to clarify the concepts of 4-vectors and Lorentz transformations.

ygolo
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
My question deals not with the Lorentz Tranformation itself, but the matrix representation of it:
18b6fe27d3b2ecf1604b998f4fa6b4a7.png


I see readily how the space-time 4-vector: [tex]x^{\mu}=\left( c \ast t, x, y, z\right)[/tex] transforms approptiately so that [tex]x^{\acute{\mu}}=\Lambda_{v}^{\acute{\mu}} \ast x^{\mu}=\left( \gamma \ast \left( c \ast t - \beta \ast x\right), \gamma \ast \left( x- \beta \ast c \ast t \right), y, z\right)[/tex].

I also see how a properly aligned Energy-Momentum 4-vector [tex]p^{\mu}=\left( \frac{E}{c}, \left|\vec{p}\right|, 0, 0\right)[/tex] transforms appropriately so that [tex]p^{\acute{\mu}}=\Lambda_{v}^{\acute{\mu}} \ast p^{\mu}=\left( \gamma \ast \left(\frac{E}{c} - \beta \ast \left|\vec{p}\right| \right), \gamma \ast \left( \left|\vec{p}\right| - \beta \ast \frac{E}{c} \right), 0, 0 \right)[/tex].

It is rather simple to use the transformed position four-vector to get the inverse of the velocity addition formula: [tex]\acute{v}=\frac{v-v_s}{1-\left(\frac{v_s \ast v}{c^2}\right)}[/tex]

...and its not too much harder to use [tex]v = \frac{\left|\vec{p}\right| \ast c^2}{E}[/tex], and the result of the Energy-momentum 4-vector, to arrive at the same formula.

However, if I use an appropriately aligned the velocity 4-vector, [tex]\zeta^{\mu}=\left(\gamma \ast c, \gamma \ast \left|\vec{v}\right|, 0, 0 \right)[/tex], I am not able to get the correct formulas. I am not even able to get the result that the speed of light is constant.

I don't know if there is some algabraic trickery needed, or if there is something more fundamental I am missing (I suspect that I am missing something fundamental).

So I ask if someone can do one of the following:
  1. Derive the velocity addition formula (or its inverse) by using the velocity 4-vector and the matrix reprecentation of the Lorentz Transformation
  2. Explain why it is misguided to attempt this.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ygolo said:
My question deals not with the Lorentz Tranformation itself, but the matrix representation of it:
I'd say that that matrix is the Lorentz transformation, and that the system of equations that corresponds to it is a trick that someone invented to make it less clear what we're really doing. (Only half kidding).

ygolo said:
Derive the velocity addition formula (or its inverse) by using the velocity 4-vector and the matrix reprecentation of the Lorentz Transformation
See e.g. #9 here. Note that I'm using units such that c=1.

You can also do it just by multiplying two Lorentz transformation matrices together and see what you get in the position(s) that's supposed to represent the velocity. I suggest you try that too. You don't have to let a Lorentz transformation act on anything to derive the velocity addition law.

ygolo said:
However, if I use an appropriately aligned the velocity 4-vector, [tex]\zeta^{\mu}=\left(\gamma \ast c, \gamma \ast \left|\vec{v}\right|, 0, 0 \right)[/tex], I am not able to get the correct formulas. I am not even able to get the result that the speed of light is constant.
Not sure what formulas you're not able to get. To see that the speed of light is invariant, find the eigenvectors of [itex]\Lambda[/itex]. Start by finding the eigenvalues from the equation

[tex]0=\det(\Lambda-\lambda I)[/tex]
 
Last edited:
I guess the conceptual component I was missing was the "re-normalization" (for lack of a better word) of the resulting vector so that the first component was [tex]\gamma \ast c[/tex] (or [tex]c[/tex]) depending on which version of velocity you are using.

I'm not sure what the mathematical justification for it is though. Neither the position 4-vector, nor the Energy-Momentum 4-vector needed "renormalization" (again I'm not sure what to call it).

I suppose all of this, "knowing the units of things implicitly" comes naturally to those who have worked with the theory for a while, but it is a bit annoying for new-commers.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 120 ·
5
Replies
120
Views
10K