Principle of Relativity: Classical Physics Example

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the principle of relativity within classical physics, specifically questioning whether the laws of physics are the same in all inertial reference frames. Participants explore examples and distinctions between classical and relativistic physics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the applicability of the principle of relativity in classical physics, seeking examples where it may not hold.
  • Another participant asserts that the principle of relativity has been upheld since Galileo, contrasting it with Aristotle's views on reference frames.
  • A different participant clarifies that Newtonian mechanics is built on the principle of relativity, emphasizing the difference between Galilean and Lorentz transformations.
  • Further, a participant explains that while Newtonian physics adheres to the principle, special relativity introduces the concept of a limiting speed (the speed of light) that does not exist in classical physics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation and implications of the principle of relativity in classical physics. There is no consensus on whether the laws of physics are the same in all inertial reference frames, as some argue for its validity while others question it.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference historical perspectives and transformations without resolving the implications of these distinctions. The discussion remains focused on the interpretations of classical versus relativistic frameworks.

abdossamad2003
Messages
68
Reaction score
4
hi everyone
"The principle of relativity: The laws of physics are the same in all inertial reference frames."
Is in classical physics The laws of physics aren't the same in all inertial reference frames!? Give an example in classical physics

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The principle of relativity holds in all systems of physics since Galileo. Aristotle would have disagreed with it, arguing that (in modern terms) the rest frame of the Earth's surface is special in some sense.

Einstein probably felt the need to state the principle explicitly since dropping it was one approach you could consider to resolve the mismatch between Maxwell and Newton. Relativity, of course, resolves the mismatch without abandoning the principle of relativity.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark and russ_watters
abdossamad2003 said:
Is in classical physics The laws of physics aren't the same in all inertial reference frames!?
No. The principle of relativity in this form was actually first enunciated by Galileo, and Newtonian mechanics is bulit on it. The difference between Newtonian mechanics and special relativity is the specific form of the transformation between different inertial frames: in Newtonian mechanics it is the Galilean transformation, in SR it is the Lorentz transformation.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark
First of all, I guess with "classical physics" you mean "Newtonian physics". Of course, in Newtonian physics the special principle of relativity must also hold. In both Newtonian physics and special relativistic physics thus Newton's 1st Law is valid, i.e., there exists an "inertial frame of reference", in which a point mass moves with constant velocity, if it's not interacting with anything.

The difference comes with Einstein's additional postulate for special relativity, i.e., that the phase velocity of electromagnetic waves in a vacuum (in short "the speed of light") is independent of the relative motion between source and detector.

Together with the additional assumptions about the symmetries of space and time you find out that you either get the Galilei transformations between two inertial reference frames,
$$t'=t, \quad \vec{x}'=\vec{x}-\vec{v} t, \quad \vec{v}=\text{const}$$
or the Lorentz transformations (making the direction of the relative velocity that in the ##x##-direction),
$$c t'=\gamma (c t-\beta x), \quad \beta=v/c, \quad \gamma=1/\sqrt{1-\beta^2},$$
$$x' = \gamma (x-\beta c t).$$
The Galilei transformations of course belong to Newtonian and the Lorentz transformations to special relativistic physics, and in special relativity, the speed of light, ##c##, is a "limiting speed", i.e., nothing can move faster than the speed of light within an inertial frame of reference. There's no such limiting speed in Newtonian physics, of course.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark

Similar threads

  • · Replies 144 ·
5
Replies
144
Views
9K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K