Solving 4-Vectors and Wave Amplitudes in Different Frames

AI Thread Summary
To show that K = (v/c, 1/λ, 0, 0) is a 4-vector, it must transform correctly under Lorentz transformations. The transformation involves substituting the variables to express K' in terms of the new frame S', resulting in K' = (v'/c, 1/λ', 0, 0). For the wave amplitude, the expression A = cos[2π(vt - x/λ)] must also be transformed, leading to a similar form in the new frame S'. The key is demonstrating that both K and the wave amplitude maintain their forms under Lorentz transformations, confirming they are 4-vectors. This approach validates the properties of 4-vectors in different reference frames.
captainjack2000
Messages
96
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I am aving a bit of trouble understanding how to show something is a 4 vector. For example K = (v/c, 1/lamdba, 0, 0 ) Show it is a 4-vector. I am not quite sure how to start this.
Similarly I have the amplitude of a wave in frame S described as A=cos[2PI(vt-x/lambda)] and need to show that the amplitude of te wave in S' can be written as cos[2PI(v't'-x'/lambda')


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


I am not sure how to do the first part

My attempt at the second part
vt-x/lambda
= vct/c - x/lambda
=v/c(gamma(ct'+beta x')) -1/lambda *gamma(x'+beta ct')
=ct' gamma(v/c-beta/lambda)-x'gamma (1/lambda-beta v/c)
using a similar question in my notes but I don't think this is right and I don't know how it helps?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think we do this question by showing that K transforms by a Lorentz transformation (since the definition of a 4 vector is a 4 component vector that transforms under Lorentz transformations).

When you do this, you'll see K'=(v'/c, 1/lambda',0,0), once you substitute in what you got for v' and 1/lambda' in the previous part. You got the same values for these as I did, by the way so I think they are correct. I'm pretty sure this is all you have to do to show it transforms by LT. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top