B Questions about Noether's theorem -- Conservation of Energy and Mass

AI Thread Summary
Noether's theorem connects symmetries in physics with conservation laws, stating that invariance under time translations corresponds to the conservation of energy, while invariance under spatial translations relates to the conservation of momentum. The discussion clarifies that conservation of mass is not a symmetry associated with space or time, as mass can change forms, such as in particle annihilation. Additionally, invariance under rotations leads to the conservation of angular momentum, and invariance under electromagnetic gauge transformations results in the conservation of electric charge. The conversation also touches on the broader implications of symmetry in physics, emphasizing its role in deriving conservation laws. Understanding these relationships is crucial for grasping fundamental principles in modern physics.
Agent Smith
Messages
345
Reaction score
36
Very basic question ... Heard someone say that Noether's theorem talks about, among other things, invariance (under transformation). Further, possibilities were discussed:
1. Invariance in time
2. Invariance in space

3. Conservation of energy (kinetic?)
4. Conservation of mass

I forgot which goes with which. Is conservation of energy about invariance in time and conservation of mass about invariance in space or is it the opposite?

Please help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Agent Smith said:
I forgot which goes with which. Is conservation of energy about invariance in time and conservation of mass about invariance in space or is it the opposite?
Energy goes with time invariance. Momentum goes with spatial invariance (translations). Angular momentum goes with invariance under rotations.
 
  • Like
Likes Agent Smith and renormalize
Agent Smith said:
I forgot which goes with which. Is conservation of energy about invariance in time and conservation of mass about invariance in space or is it the opposite?

Please help.
Invariance and Noether's theorem have the implications:
  • Invariance under translations in time ##\Rightarrow## conservation of total energy.
  • Invariance under translations in space ##\Rightarrow## conservation of total linear momentum.
  • Invariance under rotations ##\Rightarrow## conservation of total angular momentum.
  • BONUS: invariance under electromagnetic gauge transformations ##\Rightarrow## conservation of total electric charge.
But there is no "conservation of mass"; e.g., massive electrons and positrons can annihilate to create pairs of massless photons.
 
  • Like
Likes Agent Smith and jbriggs444
@jbriggs444 and @renormalize muchas gracias. 💯 💯

What does Noether's theorem actually do? Does it provide a mathematical "model" from which the conservation laws emerge/follow? I can imagine creating a/using a preexisting mathematical "object" that can parse transformations and then mapping the trasnformations and properties that are invariant under those transformations to physics entities like passage of time/movement through space and energy/momentum.
 
Agent Smith said:
Very basic question ... Heard someone say that Noether's theorem talks about, among other things, invariance (under transformation). Further, possibilities were discussed:
1. Invariance in time
2. Invariance in space

3. Conservation of energy (kinetic?)
4. Conservation of mass

I forgot which goes with which. Is conservation of energy about invariance in time and conservation of mass about invariance in space or is it the opposite?

Please help.
This is a good question. No, conservation of mass is in the non-relativistic case not described by a symmetry of space or time. In the so-called Bargmann algebra it is described by a central extension of the Galilei group, and one cannot assign spacetime transformations to it. See also chapter 3 of

https://pure.rug.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/34926446/Complete_thesis.pdf

One can reinterpret this transformation as a spatial symmetry by extending space with an extra dimension, but I can't find the paper anymore and I don't remember the details anymore (and I guess it's a bit contrived for what you ask for).

By the way, the Galilei boosts also have conserved charges along with them, but they aren't very illuminating. See e.g.

https://physics.stackexchange.com/q...ariant-associated-with-the-symmetry-of-boosts
 
  • Like
Likes Agent Smith
Agent Smith said:
@jbriggs444 and @renormalize muchas gracias. 💯 💯

What does Noether's theorem actually do? Does it provide a mathematical "model" from which the conservation laws emerge/follow? I can imagine creating a/using a preexisting mathematical "object" that can parse transformations and then mapping the trasnformations and properties that are invariant under those transformations to physics entities like passage of time/movement through space and energy/momentum.
In modern physics, one often takes symmetries as a starting point. The continuous symmetries then generate conservation laws, which you calculate by using Noether's theorem. So your question is answered "yes", although I'd rather talk of a procedure or algorithm instead of "model" ;)
 
  • Like
Likes Agent Smith
haushofer said:
symmetries
For faults that are my own, I'm fixated on reflection symmetry. It seems that symmetry has a more general meaning e.g. in rotational symmetry, there's invariance: we're unable to distinguish, post-rotation, the preimage from the image. Do you have the time to explain symmetry to me? Gracias
 
Agent Smith said:
For faults that are my own, I'm fixated on reflection symmetry.
What do you think reflection symmetry means in the context of spacetime geometry? Do you think that physical objects can undergo reflective transformations?

Agent Smith said:
It seems that symmetry has a more general meaning e.g. in rotational symmetry, there's invariance: we're unable to distinguish, post-rotation, the preimage from the image.
[Edit: this paragraph doesn't really say what I intended to say, so please don't nitpick it, but I will let it stand because the intention is to make @Agent Smith think about the differences between the symmetries of an object and of a geometry]. This is also the case for translational and rotational symmetry. However it is not the case for reflection symmetry. Does this affect what you think about the questions above?

Agent Smith said:
Do you have the time to explain symmetry to me?
No, but Wikipedia does:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symmetry_(physics)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symmetry_(geometry)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes Agent Smith, Motore and jim mcnamara
Agent Smith said:
Heard someone sa
Here we go again. Do the PF guidelines on sources mean nothing to you?
 
  • Haha
Likes Agent Smith
  • #10
Agent Smith said:
For faults that are my own, I'm fixated on reflection symmetry. It seems that symmetry has a more general meaning e.g. in rotational symmetry, there's invariance: we're unable to distinguish, post-rotation, the preimage from the image. Do you have the time to explain symmetry to me? Gracias
An expression has a symmetry if a change of coordinates leaves the expression invariant. E.g. the inner product between 2 vectors is invariant under a rotation. That's it, I guess 😋
 
  • Like
Likes Agent Smith
Back
Top