Space-time interval invariance question

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the invariance of the space-time interval in a one-dimensional approach, exploring its validity for arbitrary events and under various conditions, including those generated by light signals and tardyons. The conversation touches on the mathematical formulation and implications of these concepts within the framework of special relativity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants inquire whether the invariance of the space-time interval holds for arbitrary events in different inertial frames.
  • It is suggested that the invariance does hold for arbitrary x and t, with x' and t' related through Lorentz transformations.
  • Questions are raised about whether the invariance applies only when events are generated by the same light signal or by tardyons moving at constant speeds.
  • Some participants assert that x and t are components of a four-vector, while others discuss the implications of writing x as a function of velocity.
  • One participant describes the interval as the Minkowski space "scalar product" of a four-vector, emphasizing its invariance under Lorentz transformations.
  • There is a discussion about the relationship between proper length and Lorentz contraction, with equations provided to illustrate the transformation of lengths between different frames.
  • Participants explore whether the lengths L and L' can be considered components of a "two vector" and discuss potential connections to the concept of wave vectors.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the conditions under which the invariance of the space-time interval holds, with some asserting it applies broadly and others suggesting limitations based on the nature of the events considered. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of the derived equations for lengths and their transformation properties.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on specific definitions of proper length and the conditions under which velocities are considered, as well as the unresolved nature of the mathematical relationships presented.

bernhard.rothenstein
Messages
988
Reaction score
1
Cinsider please the invariance of the space-time interval in an one space dimension approach
(x-0)2-c2(t-0)2=(x'-0)2-c2(t'-0)2
My question is: does it hold for arbitrary events (x,t) in I and (x',t') in I?
Does it hold only in the case when the events are genertated in I and I' by the same light signal (x=ct,t=x/c); (x'=ct',t'=x'/c) or in the case when the events are generated by the same tardyon moving with speed u in I and u' in I' i.e. (x=ut,t=x/u) and (x'=u't', t'=x'/u')?
Are x and x' the components of a "two" vector or only x=ct, x'=ct' and x=ut, x'=u't', u amd u' being related by the addition law of parallel speeds?
Thanks for your answer.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
bernhard.rothenstein said:
Cinsider please the invariance of the space-time interval in an one space dimension approach
(x-0)2-c2(t-0)2=(x'-0)2-c2(t'-0)2
My question is: does it hold for arbitrary events (x,t) in I and (x',t') in I?
QUOTE]
It holds for arbitrary x and t with x' and t' given by a LT from S to S'.
 
bernhard.rothenstein said:
Does it hold only in the case when the events are genertated in I and I' by the same light signal (x=ct,t=x/c); (x'=ct',t'=x'/c) or in the case when the events are generated by the same tardyon moving with speed u in I and u' in I' i.e. (x=ut,t=x/u) and (x'=u't', t'=x'/u')?
It holds for any x and t. If x is written as x=ut, then x' will =u't', with u'given by the relativistic velocity addiltion.
 
bernhard.rothenstein said:
Are x and x' the components of a "two" vector or only x=ct, x'=ct' and x=ut, x'=u't', u amd u' being related by the addition law of parallel speeds?
x and t are two components of a four-vector, as are x' and t'. Writing x=ut implies that a consstant velocity, which is not necessary for t^2-x^2 to be invariant.
 
The "interval" [itex]-(x^0)^2+\vec x^2[/itex] is invariant because it's the Minkowski space "scalar product" of a four-vector with itself. The "scalar product" (which isn't really a scalar product since the result can be negative) is defined by

[tex]\langle y,x \rangle=y^T\eta x=-y^0x^0+\vec y\cdot\vec x[/tex]

This is invariant under Lorentz transformations because all Lorentz transformations satisfy the condition [itex]\Lambda^T\eta\Lambda=\eta[/itex].

[tex]\langle \Lambda y,\Lambda x\rangle=(\Lambda y)^T\eta (\Lambda x)=y^T\Lambda^T\eta\Lambda x=y^T\eta x=\langle y,x \rangle[/tex]
 
[tex]\Delta[/tex]
clem said:
x and t are two components of a four-vector, as are x' and t'. Writing x=ut implies that a consstant velocity, which is not necessary for t^2-x^2 to be invariant.

Thanks for your answer. Consider please the inertial reference frames I, I' and I" in the standard arrangement. I' moves with velocity V relative to I and I" moves with speed u relative to I and with speed u' relative to I' all speed showing in the positive direction of the overlapped x, x' and x" axes. A rod of proper length L(0) is located along the overlapped axes at rest relative to I". Observers from I measure its Lorentz contracted length
L=L(0)(1-u2/c2)1/2. (1)
For observers from I' the length of the same rod is
L'=L(0)(1-u'2/c2)1/2 (2)
Eliminating L(0) between (1) and (2) we obtain that the non-proper lengths are related by
L=L'(1-u2/c2)1/2/(1-u'2)/c21/2) (3)
Expressing the right side of (3) as a function of u' via the addition law of parallel speeds it becomes
L=L'(1-V2/c2)1/2)/[1+Vu'/c2] (4)
resulting that L and L' do not transform via the Lorentz transformation. Under such conditions are L=Dx and L'Dx' the components of a "two vector? Equation (4) suggests that 1/L and 1/L' are. Is there some connection with the concept of wave vector?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 101 ·
4
Replies
101
Views
7K
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
7K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K