Scalar Definition: Transformations & Frames

  • Thread starter Thread starter copernicus1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Definition Scalar
Click For Summary
The discussion addresses the terminology used to differentiate between scalars that transform between frames and those that remain constant. Energy is highlighted as a scalar that varies with the frame, while the length of a vector is a scalar that remains the same across frames. The terms "Galilean invariant scalars" and "Lorentz invariant scalars" are introduced to categorize scalars based on their frame invariance. The Lagrangian density is identified as a Lorentz scalar, whereas the time-like component of the 4-momentum, representing energy, is not. Overall, while context often clarifies these distinctions, specific terminology exists in physics to denote different types of scalars.
copernicus1
Messages
98
Reaction score
0
Is there conventional terminology to distinguish between scalars that transform between frames and those that don't? For example, energy is a single-component quantity but it isn't the same in every frame, whereas the length of a vector is also a scalar but is the same in every frame. Do we just call these both scalars, and be precise about what we mean, or are there terms for these different kinds of single-component quantities?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In general, it is understood very easily from context. However there are names ascribed to certain special scalars, as far as physics goes, that distinguishes them based on frame invariance. For example, scalars invariant under Galilean boosts are called Galilean invariant scalars and scalars invariant under Lorentz boosts are called Lorentz invariant scalars or just Lorentz scalars. Thus the Lagrangian density is a Lorentz scalar whereas the time-like component of the 4-momentum, which is the energy as you stated, is not a Lorentz scalar (nor even a Galilean scalar). As purely mathematical mappings however, they are both functions of space-time into the reals so there isn't much distinction in that regard.
 
I'm not a student or graduate in Astrophysics.. Wish i were though... I was playing with distances between planets... I found that Mars, Ceres, Jupiter and Saturn have somthing in common... They are in a kind of ratio with another.. They all got a difference about 1,84 to 1,88x the distance from the previous planet, sub-planet. On average 1,845x. I thought this can be coincidential. So i took the big moons of Jupiter and Saturn to do the same thing jupiter; Io, Europa and Ganymede have a...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K