Understanding Spacetime Diagrams

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter NoahsArk
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Diagrams Spacetime
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on understanding spacetime diagrams, particularly in the context of special relativity. Participants explore how to create and interpret these diagrams from various reference points, including the representation of worldlines and lines of simultaneity. The conversation includes practical advice on drawing diagrams and the theoretical implications of different geometrical frameworks.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest various methods for drawing spacetime diagrams, including using paper, art programs, or specific software tools.
  • One participant explains the basic concepts of spacetime diagrams, emphasizing the importance of timelines and worldlines, and suggests a sequence for drawing different types of diagrams.
  • Another participant highlights the need to abandon Euclidean geometry when working with Minkowski diagrams, stressing the significance of the Minkowski metric in constructing accurate diagrams.
  • Some participants express the value of drawing light clocks on diagrams to illustrate relativistic concepts and make predictions about scenarios like the twin paradox.
  • There is mention of confusion regarding Lorentz transformations and velocity addition when visualizing them on diagrams, indicating a need for further clarification.
  • A participant shares a link to a Javascript tool that animates frame changes, which may aid in understanding these transformations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the importance of understanding spacetime diagrams and the need to approach them with the correct geometrical framework. However, there are differing opinions on the complexity of the diagrams and the best methods for visualizing transformations, indicating that multiple competing views remain.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note limitations in their understanding of Lorentz transformations and the construction of axes scales, suggesting that these aspects require further exploration and clarification.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and enthusiasts of physics, particularly those interested in special relativity and the graphical representation of spacetime concepts.

  • #31
NoahsArk said:
I assume you are not saying that the equation ##ds^2=dt^2−dx^2## is another way of writing one of the Lorentz transformations?
Correct (I’m not saying that). It is an expression of the line element, or the metric, for the Minkowski plane, i.e. what makes the Minkowski plane fundamentally different from the Euclidean plane. The quantity ##ds^2## is invariant—for any two points on the plane, regardless of the frame of reference or the choice of coordinates, ##ds^2## will be the same. The analogous version of this in Euclidean space is the distance between two points (squared). It doesn’t matter how you rotate the space or move it around or assign coordinates to the points—the distance between the points stays the same.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
NoahsArk said:
robphy said:
Here are two 3-4-5 triangles in Minkowski spacetime.
I tried to read through the diagram, but, in general, because of my level, I could not understand what is going on in it. There is a lot of detail, and I wasn't sure which lines represent the world lines of which frames, whose frame of reference the diagram was drawn in, etc. Also, all the lines are diagonal and there is no set of vertical lines and horizontal lines for the time and space axis of the main frame. Things need to be greatly simplified for me:)

The diagrams below are based on the standard spacetime diagram that was drawn by @Mister T above .

I have reproduced my diagram with usual [unrotated] graph paper
along with the rotated graph paper version.

Note that the observer's frames of reference are determined by the joining opposite corners of the diamonds (that is, the diagonals of the diamonds). So, it's drawn in the frame where the red-observer (along the vertical OP) is at rest. The space-direction for red is along the horizontal PQ... just like the ordinary spacetime diagrams like what you are drawing. To get the grid for red, just join the corresponding corners parallel to the red diamond diagonals.)

(The rotated grid lines represent light-cones, which in my opinion is at the heart of special relativity...
and it's this grid that allows calculations to be done easier, when the method is followed... because it's easier to count little diamonds in the grid to compute the area.
One advantage of the rotated graph paper is that
it can display many reference frames on the same diagram.
If you want the grid for blue, just join the corresponding corners parallel to blue diamond diagonals. )

1570412919562.png
1570412936622.png
1570420208350.png
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
  • #33
NoahsArk said:
Regarding the hypotenuse not being the longest side of the triangle, if you take a literal measurement of this diagram with a rule and measure the length of the red line segment between the two sparks, the length will come out to be 5.83, which would be the longest side of the triangle. So, I must be missing something?
Yes, you are missing the fact that the length of the hypotenuse can't be measured with a ruler on a spacetime diagram. In this case (see Post #26) the length is 4 seconds.

You are writing ##t'^2=t^2-x^2##, so in this case we have ##t'^2=5^2-3^2##, so ##t'= 4##.

A more general expression is ##t'^2-x'^2=t^2-x^2##, but in this case ##x'=0## because both events happened at the same place in the rocket frame. When two events happen at the same place, the time that elapses between them is called the proper time ##\tau##. Therefore ##\tau^2=t^2-x^2##. It's a relativistic invariant.
 
  • #34
NoahsArk said:
I tried to draw a line of simultaneity for the rocket at the point of the second explosion (the explosions are marked with asterisks). That looks like this:

diagram-2-2019-10-6-jpg.jpg


This shows that from the rocket's perspective, the tree frame's clock read 3.2 seconds during the time when the second explosion occurred.
Just a helpful tip: in spacetime diagrams where light traces out lines at 45 degree angles (which is the case here as well as in most spacetime diagrams you’ll see), the worldline of a physical object and that object’s lines of simultaneity will always be symmetrical with respect to light rays—i.e. light rays bisect the angles made between a worldline and it’s line of simultaneity. I see in your otherwise well drawn diagram that the rocket’s worldline goes over 2 units for every 3 units up, which means the lines of simultaneity should go over 3 units for every 2 units up, but it looks like yours is going over 4. The rocket should say the tree’s clock read 3.0 at the time of the second explosion.
 
  • #35
Pencilvester said:
the rocket’s worldline goes over 2 units for every 3 units up
Never mind, I was looking at too small a portion of your lines. It does look like on average your slopes are 5/3 and 3/5.
 
  • #36
Pencilvester said:
I see in your otherwise well drawn diagram that the rocket’s worldline goes over 2 units for every 3 units up, which means the lines of simultaneity should go over 3 units for every 2 units up

This is a very helpful tip! So, to get the slope of the line of simultaneity given the X and Y coordinates of the worldline, we just flip the numbers. E.g. if the car is moving at .1 c, then for every movement of .1 to the right, the y movement is 1 (.1, 1). The line of simultaneity, then, would have coordinates of (1, .1) and the slope is .1?

robphy said:
The rotated grid lines represent light-cones, which in my opinion is at the heart of special relativity

It was through watching a video about light cones that I first started to understand the rule about why two events can never occur in reverse order, no matter which frame of reference is observing them, when the first event had caused the second event to occur:

 
  • #37
NoahsArk said:
It was through watching a video about light cones that I first started to understand the rule about why two events can never occur in reverse order, no matter which frame of reference is observing them, when the first event had caused the second event to occur:
If the first event caused the second event then their separation is timelike and what you say about the order is true. If the events have a spacelike separation then the order of the events varies with different reference frames. In particular, there will be a frame where the events are simultaneous.
 
  • #38
NoahsArk said:
the slope is .1?
Yes, ##\frac{dt}{dx}=0.1## for the lines of simultaneity of an object moving with ##\frac{dx}{dt}=0.1##.
 

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K