Special relativity - time dilation

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on applying Lorentz transformations to analyze two events occurring at the origin of an inertial observer's frame. It establishes that these events, while simultaneous in one frame, occur at different positions in another frame, specifically at x=vt and x_2=γvT. Confusion arises regarding the time transformation, particularly in deriving the correct relationship between time and position coordinates. Clarification is provided that the derived relations are valid for the specific events, and using inverse Lorentz transformations could simplify the process. The importance of structuring questions clearly for better understanding is also emphasized.
Achmed
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Consider two events that take place at the origin of the frame of an inertial observer O'. At times t_1 ' = 0 and t_2 ' = T. O' moves with a constant speed v w.r.t. another inertial observer O.

1. Use the Lorentz-transformations to show that these events occur at x=vt in the frame of O, at the times t_1 = 0 and t_2 = \gamma T. Show furthermore that the events do not occur at the same place in O, but at x_1=0 and x_2 = \gamma vT.

My attempt below. I am very confused, so I have no idea if what I'm doing is even remotely correct:

Since both events take place at the origin of S', we get that x' = 0. From here it follows using the Lorentz transformation that x=vt.

After this the confusion starts. If we use the Lorentz transformation for time, and we use t'_1 = 0, we actually get t_1 = \dfrac{vx}{c^2}. But this doesn't correspond with what they ask, right? If we do the same for t_2' = T, we get the very same problem. What am I doing incorrectly here?

Using the same tactic above, if I fill in x' = 0 and t_1 = 0 and t_2 = \gamma T, I do get the correct answers for x_1 and x_2! So, that confuses me..
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You did not do something wrong. It is just that you got a relation between two unknowns, ##x_1## and ##t_1## (the x coordinate corresponding to ##t_1## should be ##x_1##). In order to find another equation to help you, use what you just derived from the Lorentz transformation of x, it must be true in particular for ##t_1## and ##x_1##.

The alternative is to use the inverse Lorentz transformations from the start, what you are doing essentially corresponds to inverting the transform anyway.

For future reference, you should also leave the homework template when posting your question. It helps ordering your thoughts and structure the post so that we can grasp your problem quicker.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top