Undergrad Relativistic Velocity Transformation: Diff. Operator Explained

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on understanding the differentiation process in the context of relativistic velocity transformation as presented in Tipler's modern physics textbook. The key equation for position is x' = y(x - vt), where y is the gamma constant. The user seeks clarification on the differential operator used in deriving the velocity equation from this position equation. The response explains that one can either use a rigorous limit approach or treat the differentials as infinitesimals to derive the relationship between dx' and dt'. This clarification helps the user grasp the underlying concepts of differentiation in relativistic physics.
Daniel5423
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I'm reading modern physics, Tipler 5th edition, pages 21 and 22, and I'm not understanding how the differentiation was done from the position to find the velocity.
Equation for position: x'= y(x - vt)
y is the gamma constant.

Then in the first step to find the velocity, a derivative was done:
dx'= y(dx - vdt)From the above equation, it was used to find the relativistic equation for velocity, and I understand that part. but what I don't understand is what the differential operator was is in the derivative, such as something like d/dt. If I take d/dt to both sides of the equation, then I do not see how the above equation was found. Could someone please explain to me what the differential operator was used to find the above equation? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Use dt'=\gamma(t-vx/c^2), and divide dx' by dt' to get dx'/dt'=v'.
 
Take two nearby events, (x,t) and (x+dx,t+dt). In the primed frame the coordinates of these two events are (x',t') and (x'+dx',t'+dt'). The Lorentz transforms give you a relationship between x' and x and t, and between x'+dx' and x+dx and t+dt. Then you should be able to get the relationship you want.

Formally, you should probably start with x+Δx (etc) and then take the limit as Δ becomes infinitesimal. Generally physicists just assume that would work (because it always does in physically realistic situations), but that attitude tends to drive mathematicians to drink.
 
  • Like
Likes sweet springs
Meir Achuz said:
dt'=\gamma(t-vx/c^2)
I don't think this formula is correct. The RHS should have dt and dx or the LHS should not have dt'.
 
Daniel5423 said:
I'm reading modern physics, Tipler 5th edition, pages 21 and 22, and I'm not understanding how the differentiation was done from the position to find the velocity.
Equation for position: x'= y(x - vt)
y is the gamma constant.

Then in the first step to find the velocity, a derivative was done:
dx'= y(dx - vdt)From the above equation, it was used to find the relativistic equation for velocity, and I understand that part. but what I don't understand is what the differential operator was is in the derivative, such as something like d/dt. If I take d/dt to both sides of the equation, then I do not see how the above equation was found. Could someone please explain to me what the differential operator was used to find the above equation? Thanks.

Sounds like you're confusing the infinitesimal with the derivative.

First, the Lorentz transformation (using ##c=1##):

##\Delta x^\prime = \gamma (\Delta x - v \Delta t)##
##\Delta t^\prime = \gamma (\Delta t - v \Delta x)##.

Now, to find ##dx^\prime / dt^\prime##, there's a more "rigorous" way and there's a shortcut. The "rigorous" way is:

##\dfrac{dx^\prime}{dt^\prime} = \lim_{\Delta t^\prime \rightarrow 0} \dfrac{\Delta x^\prime}{\Delta t^\prime} = \lim_{\Delta t \rightarrow 0} \dfrac{\gamma (\Delta x - v \Delta t)}{\gamma (\Delta t - v \Delta x)} = \dfrac{\lim_{\Delta t \rightarrow 0} \left( \frac{\Delta x}{\Delta t} - v \right)}{\lim_{\Delta t \rightarrow 0} \left( 1 - v \frac{\Delta x}{\Delta t} \right)} = \dfrac{\frac{dx}{dt} - v}{1 - v \frac{dx}{dt}}##.

The shortcut is to regard ##dx^\prime## and ##dt^\prime## as infinitesimals in the first place—i.e., infinitesimally small "versions" of the finite changes ##\Delta x^\prime## and ##\Delta t^\prime##—and just divide them. So use ##d##'s instead of ##\Delta##'s in the first equations above:

##d x^\prime = \gamma (d x - v \, d t)##
##d t^\prime = \gamma (d t - v \, d x)##

and divide:

##\dfrac{dx^\prime}{dt^\prime} = \dfrac{ \gamma (d x - v \, d t)}{\gamma (d t - v \, d x)} = \dfrac{\frac{dx}{dt} - v}{1 - v \frac{dx}{dt}}##.
 
  • Like
Likes sweet springs, PeroK and Orodruin
SiennaTheGr8 said:
Sounds like you're confusing the infinitesimal with the derivative.

First, the Lorentz transformation (using ##c=1##):

##\Delta x^\prime = \gamma (\Delta x - v \Delta t)##
##\Delta t^\prime = \gamma (\Delta t - v \Delta x)##.

Now, to find ##dx^\prime / dt^\prime##, there's a more "rigorous" way and there's a shortcut. The "rigorous" way is:

##\dfrac{dx^\prime}{dt^\prime} = \lim_{\Delta t^\prime \rightarrow 0} \dfrac{\Delta x^\prime}{\Delta t^\prime} = \lim_{\Delta t \rightarrow 0} \dfrac{\gamma (\Delta x - v \Delta t)}{\gamma (\Delta t - v \Delta x)} = \dfrac{\lim_{\Delta t \rightarrow 0} \left( \frac{\Delta x}{\Delta t} - v \right)}{\lim_{\Delta t \rightarrow 0} \left( 1 - v \frac{\Delta x}{\Delta t} \right)} = \dfrac{\frac{dx}{dt} - v}{1 - v \frac{dx}{dt}}##.

The shortcut is to regard ##dx^\prime## and ##dt^\prime## as infinitesimals in the first place—i.e., infinitesimally small "versions" of the finite changes ##\Delta x^\prime## and ##\Delta t^\prime##—and just divide them. So use ##d##'s instead of ##\Delta##'s in the first equations above:

##d x^\prime = \gamma (d x - v \, d t)##
##d t^\prime = \gamma (d t - v \, d x)##

and divide:

##\dfrac{dx^\prime}{dt^\prime} = \dfrac{ \gamma (d x - v \, d t)}{\gamma (d t - v \, d x)} = \dfrac{\frac{dx}{dt} - v}{1 - v \frac{dx}{dt}}##.

Thanks! That helped me understand it better.
 
In an inertial frame of reference (IFR), there are two fixed points, A and B, which share an entangled state $$ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|0>_A|1>_B+|1>_A|0>_B) $$ At point A, a measurement is made. The state then collapses to $$ |a>_A|b>_B, \{a,b\}=\{0,1\} $$ We assume that A has the state ##|a>_A## and B has ##|b>_B## simultaneously, i.e., when their synchronized clocks both read time T However, in other inertial frames, due to the relativity of simultaneity, the moment when B has ##|b>_B##...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
9K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K