Regarding notation for Lorentz transformation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the notation used for Lorentz transformations, specifically the symbols Δ^{σ}_{μ} and Δ_{σ}^{μ}. Participants explore the implications of these notations, their inverses, and the preferred symbols in the context of relativity.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks clarification on the relationship between Δ^{σ}_{μ} and Δ_{σ}^{μ} as they pertain to Lorentz transformations.
  • Another participant asserts that the two symbols are mutual inverses.
  • Some participants note that the conventional symbol for Lorentz transformations is \Lambda, not Δ.
  • There is a suggestion to use LaTeX for clarity in mathematical expressions, with some arguing for the use of UTF instead.
  • One participant expresses regret for using Δ instead of \Lambda, indicating a preference for conventional notation.
  • A participant discusses the invariance of x^{α}x_{α} under Lorentz transformations, emphasizing the significance of index notation.
  • Another participant warns against placing primes on indices rather than on the symbols, arguing it can lead to misleading interpretations in equations.
  • There is a discussion about the clarity of notation when referring to multiple frames of reference in Lorentz transformations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriate notation for Lorentz transformations, with no consensus on the use of Δ versus \Lambda. The discussion includes both support for LaTeX and UTF, indicating a lack of agreement on formatting preferences. Additionally, there are competing perspectives on the clarity of index notation.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the potential for confusion in notation and the importance of distinguishing between different frames of reference, but these concerns remain unresolved.

grzz
Messages
1,036
Reaction score
28
Difficulty regarding notation for Lorentz transformation

Please can somebody explain to me the relation between Δ[itex]^{σ}[/itex][itex]_{μ}[/itex] and Δ[itex]_{σ}[/itex][itex]^{μ}[/itex] as symbols representing a Lorentz transformation?

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It was silly of me to use Δ instead of [itex]\Lambda[/itex].

Thanks everybody for the help given.
 
Bill_K said:
Or in many cases, you can use UTF and avoid Latex entirely: Λμν = ημσ Λστ ητν

No! Please use LaTeX. It's not only quicker to type but also better to read. You write for the reader and not for yourself. A bit effort to make your text as readable as possible increases to probability to be read tremendously!
 
vanhees71 said:
No! Please use LaTeX. It's not only quicker to type but also better to read. You write for the reader and not for yourself. A bit effort to make your text as readable as possible increases to probability to be read tremendously!
That's why I use UTF.
 
So one can write

x[itex]^{μ^{'}}[/itex]x[itex]_{μ^{'}}[/itex]= λ[itex]^{μ^{'}}[/itex][itex]_{α}[/itex]x[itex]^{α}[/itex] λ[itex]_{μ^{'}}[/itex][itex]^{β}[/itex] x[itex]_{β}[/itex] = [itex]\delta[/itex][itex]^{β}_{α}[/itex] x[itex]^{α}[/itex]x[itex]_{β}[/itex] = x[itex]^{α}[/itex]x[itex]_{α}[/itex]

showing the invariance of x[itex]^{α}[/itex]x[itex]_{α}[/itex] under the Lorentz transformation.

Hence the notation of the indices itself suggests the position of the various indices.
 
That's also a very misleading notation. Don't put the primes at the indices but on the symbol, i.e., the above equation you should write
[tex]x'^{\mu} x'_{\mu}={\Lambda^{\mu}}_{\alpha} {\Lambda_{\mu}}^{\beta} x^{\alpha} x_{\beta}=\delta_{\alpha}^{\beta} x^{\beta} x_{\alpha}=x^{\alpha} x_{\alpha}.[/tex]
It can be pretty misleading to put the primes on the indices rather than the symbol, because if you rename simply dummy indices in a Einstein-convention sum it's a trivial identity:
[tex]x^{\alpha} x_{\alpha}=x^{\mu'} x_{\mu'}.[/tex]
Here the dummy index on the rhs of the equation simply is called [itex]\mu'[/itex] and that's it.
 
  • #10
vanhees71 said:
No! Please use LaTeX. It's not only quicker to type but also better to read. You write for the reader and not for yourself. A bit effort to make your text as readable as possible increases to probability to be read tremendously!
What part of Λμν = ημσ Λστ ητν do you find difficult to read?
 
  • #11
Not all Greek letters look that Greek: tau, nu.
 
  • #12
vanhees71 said:
...It can be pretty misleading to put the primes on the indices rather than the symbol, because if you rename simply dummy indices in a Einstein-convention sum it's a trivial identity:
[tex]x^{\alpha} x_{\alpha}=x^{\mu'} x_{\mu'}.[/tex]
Here the dummy index on the rhs of the equation simply is called [itex]\mu'[/itex] and that's it.

Yes if one renames simply dummy indices in a Einstein-convention sum then it's a trivial identity and such use of indices IS misleading.

But denoting a Lorentz transformation by [itex]\Lambda[/itex][itex]^{μ'}[/itex][itex]_{β}[/itex] will show that the Lorentz transformation is between the frame of reference labelled by the primed indices and the frame of reference with the unprimed indices.

Hence if one is talking about three Lorentz transformations involving frames of reference labelled by xμ, xμ' and xμ'' one can distinguish which transformation one is using.

Thanks everyone for your help. I am a starter in all this!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 101 ·
4
Replies
101
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
4K