Quick question about lorentz transforms

  • Thread starter Thread starter spacelike
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lorentz
spacelike
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
So there's something that has bothered me for quite some time.

I know the normal equations of time dilation and length contraction are the following:
\Delta t'=\gamma \Delta t and L'=\frac{L}{\gamma}

where the primed variables are in reference frame S' and the unprimed variables are in reference frame S. With frame S' moving with velocity v relative to frame S.


Ok, so far so good. Now when we try to look at the same thing with Lorentz transformations (in other words: derive the above from Lorentz transformations)
we have:
t'=\gamma(t-\frac{v}{c^{2}}x)
x'=\gamma(x-vt)

When deriving time dilation we simply take it that the event which lasts duration t in reference frame S, is at x=0. Therefore we immediately get:
t'=\gamma t
\Delta t'=t'_{2}-t'_{1}=\gamma t_{2}-\gamma t_{1}
\Delta t'=\gamma \Delta t

Great, that gives us time dilation as expected.. Now the problem I'm having is with length contraction. So starting again from the lorentz equation:
x'=\gamma(x-vt)

This time we consider that we measure the length at t=0, leaving us with:
x'=\gamma x
Now to get length:

L'=x'_{2}-x'_{1}=\gamma x_{2}-\gamma x_{1}=\gamma L

That means that according to Lorentz transformations:
L'=\gamma L

However, according to the formula for length contraction which I wrote at the top:
L'=\frac{L}{\gamma}

These are totally opposite!
what am I doing wrong?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Suppose x_1 and x_2 are the positions of the ends of a rod, in the unprimed frame. In the primed frame, the rod is moving, so to get the length of the rod in that frame, you have to measure the positions of the two ends at the same time in that frame.

However, the x_1^\prime and x_2^\prime that you've gotten from the Lorentz transformation, correspond to different times in the primed frame, even though you measured x_1 and x_2 at the same time (t = 0) in the unprimed frame. So x_2^\prime - x_1^\prime \ne L^\prime.
 
Thank you!
That cleared it up perfectly
So now I see that I would have to use x=\gamma(x'+vt)
and that gives the correct equation for length contraction
 
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. The Relativator was sold by (as printed) Atomic Laboratories, Inc. 3086 Claremont Ave, Berkeley 5, California , which seems to be a division of Cenco Instruments (Central Scientific Company)... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/relativator-circular-slide-rule-simulated-with-desmos/ by @robphy

Similar threads

Back
Top