Understanding Special Relativity and Coordinates

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on understanding special relativity with a focus on the concept of coordinates within the framework of spacetime as an affine space. Participants explore the mathematical structures involved, including the nature of the metric and its implications for different coordinate systems.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes spacetime as an affine space associated with a four-dimensional real vector space, noting the absence of a prechosen basis for defining coordinates.
  • The same participant explains that the metric defined on the vector space has a signature of (+,−,−,−) when using a standard Cartesian basis, which is not unique.
  • Another participant suggests that the term "fundamental form" is more appropriate than "metric" in the context of relativity, arguing that the metric is not positive definite.
  • A later reply reiterates the point about the independence of the signature of the fundamental form from the choice of basis.
  • One participant connects the discussion to Gauss's theory of curved surfaces, indicating a historical context for the terminology used.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the terminology used to describe the metric in relativity, with some advocating for "fundamental form" while others maintain the use of "metric." The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these terms.

Contextual Notes

There is a lack of consensus on the appropriateness of terminology and the implications of the metric's properties, particularly regarding its positive definiteness and its independence from the choice of basis.

lriuui0x0
Messages
101
Reaction score
25
I'd like to get some help on checking my understanding of special relativity, specifically I'm trying to clarify the idea of coordinates. Any comment is really appreciated!

The spacetime is an affine space ##M^4##, which is associated with a 4 dimensional real vector space ##\mathbb{R}^4##. This vector space is abstract, and no basis is prechosen, so there's no canonical way to define what the coordinate might be.

There's a metirc g defined on the vector space ##\mathbb{R}^4##. This inner product has the property that for a particular set of basis, it has ##(+,−,−,−)## signature. Such a basis is a standard Cartesian basis, which is not unique.

The linear maps ##\mathbb{R}^4 \to \mathbb{R}^4## between the sets of standard basis form the Lorentz group. The affine maps ##M^4 \to M^4## between the set of standard basis form the Poincare group. All such maps have the metric signature ##(+, -, -, -)##.

Coordinates is a map ##M^4 \to \mathbb{R}^4## (here ##\mathbb{R}^4## means a four real number tuple, not an abstrct vector space). Any Cartesian basis at a point defines a Cartesian coordinates by defining the coordinates to be the components of the vector. The standard Cartesian coordinates defined as above is the same as the coordinates being inertial. Other coordinates are non-inertial, in which the metric components don't have ##(+, -, -, -)## signature.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Physics news on Phys.org
The signature of a fundamental form (it's a better word than "metric", because the "metric" in relativity is not really a metric, because it's not positive definite) is independent of the choice of basis.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: lriuui0x0
vanhees71 said:
The signature of a fundamental form (it's a better word than "metric", because the "metric" in relativity is not really a metric, because it's not positive definite) is independent of the choice of basis.
Fundamental form is already used in "the first and second fundamental forms".
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
I guess that's where the naming comes from since Gauss's theory of curved surfaces is the paradigmatic example for the use of a differentiable manifold.
 
Thanks for the checking!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
998
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K