Relativistic Notation in Waves: Confusion Solved

In summary: The symbol for the vector is written as ##x^\alpha k_\alpha##.The symbol for the vector is written as ##x^\alpha k_\alpha##.
  • #1
kent davidge
933
56
If we have a plane wave, usually in Relativity notation it is written as ##A^\alpha = a^\alpha \exp(i x_\alpha k^\alpha)##. (I know we need to take the real part in the end). In cartesian coordinates, and two dimensions say, that ##x_\alpha k^\alpha## would be ##x^\alpha k_\alpha = x k_x + y k_y##. How does it reads in polar coordinates? ##x^\alpha' k_\alpha' = r k_r + \theta k_\theta = r [(\partial x/ \partial r)k_x + (\partial y/ \partial r)k_y] + \theta [(\partial x/\partial \theta )k_x + (\partial y/\partial \theta )k_y] = r (\cos\theta k_x + \sin\theta k_y) + \theta[(-r\sin\theta ) k_x + (r\cos\theta ) k_y]##. The first term is just equal to its version in Cartesian coordinates. But then there is that second term, which makes ##x^\alpha' k_\alpha' \neq x^\alpha k_\alpha##. I already expected this result from the fact that ##x^\alpha## do not transform like, and thus are not, four vectors. So a product like ##x^\alpha k_\alpha## will not be a scalar.

But then what does this result mean? A field like ##A^\alpha = a^\alpha \exp(i x_\alpha k^\alpha)## will not transform as a vector if the exponent is not a scalar. But it should transform as a vector. So what we do?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
If you want to do non-Minkowski coordinates, then you should replace ##x^\alpha## by the event vector (which in Minkowski coordinates have the coordinates as components - just like the position vector in Cartesian coordinates in Euclidean space has the coordinates as components).
 
  • #3
Orodruin said:
event vector
Sorry, I never heard about the event vector. What is it?
 
  • #4
kent davidge said:
Sorry, I never heard about the event vector. What is it?
It is the same thing in Minkowski space as the position vector is in Euclidean space.
 
  • #5
Orodruin said:
It is the same thing in Minkowski space as the position vector is in Euclidean space.
Ok. That makes a lot of sense.

- we know that in Minkowski coordinates the term has the form ##x^\alpha k_\alpha##;
- we also know that it should be a scalar;
- so we identify ##x^\alpha## as the components of a vector;

Do you know which symbol is used to denote this vector?
 

1. What is relativistic notation in waves?

Relativistic notation in waves is a way of expressing the properties of waves, such as frequency and wavelength, in terms of the speed of light. It takes into account the effects of special relativity, which states that the laws of physics are the same for all observers in uniform motion.

2. How is relativistic notation different from regular notation?

Regular notation does not take into account the effects of special relativity, while relativistic notation does. This means that relativistic notation is more accurate in describing the properties of waves, especially at high speeds.

3. Why is there confusion surrounding relativistic notation in waves?

There is confusion surrounding relativistic notation in waves because it is a relatively new concept and can be difficult to understand. Additionally, many people are more familiar with regular notation and may not be aware of the differences between the two.

4. How can I use relativistic notation in my research or experiments?

If you are working with waves at high speeds, it is important to use relativistic notation in order to accurately describe and analyze your data. You can use equations and formulas that incorporate relativistic notation, or convert your regular notation values into relativistic notation.

5. Are there any practical applications for relativistic notation in waves?

Yes, relativistic notation in waves has practical applications in fields such as astrophysics, where objects are moving at extremely high speeds. It is also important in technologies such as GPS, which rely on accurate measurements of time and distance, which are affected by relativistic effects.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
14
Views
803
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
30
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
887
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
569
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
676
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
573
Back
Top