Backpacker
- 9
- 0
Consider the time-reversal Lorentz transformation given by the 4x4 matrix:
\Lambda_T = \begin{pmatrix}<br /> -1 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 &1 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 &1<br /> \end{pmatrix}.<br />
In my relativistic quantum mechanics lecture, we discussed how the electromagnetic 4-potential transforms under this particular Lorentz transformation. Without invoking any sort of mathematical argument, the prof argued that the four-potential transforms as
<br /> \begin{align*}<br /> A_0 (x^0,x^i)\longmapsto & A'_0 (x'^0,x'^i)=A_0 (-x^0,x^i)\\<br /> A_j (x^0,x^i)\longmapsto & A'_j (x'^0,x'^i)=-A_j (-x^0,x^i)<br /> \end{align*}<br />
based on the idea that currents reverse under time-reversal.
Is there a good mathematical reasoning for this? It seems to me that since four-vectors transform as A\mapsto \Lambda A, the minus sign should be applied to A_0.
\Lambda_T = \begin{pmatrix}<br /> -1 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 &1 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 &1<br /> \end{pmatrix}.<br />
In my relativistic quantum mechanics lecture, we discussed how the electromagnetic 4-potential transforms under this particular Lorentz transformation. Without invoking any sort of mathematical argument, the prof argued that the four-potential transforms as
<br /> \begin{align*}<br /> A_0 (x^0,x^i)\longmapsto & A'_0 (x'^0,x'^i)=A_0 (-x^0,x^i)\\<br /> A_j (x^0,x^i)\longmapsto & A'_j (x'^0,x'^i)=-A_j (-x^0,x^i)<br /> \end{align*}<br />
based on the idea that currents reverse under time-reversal.
Is there a good mathematical reasoning for this? It seems to me that since four-vectors transform as A\mapsto \Lambda A, the minus sign should be applied to A_0.