B What is x' for Moving Rocket from P?

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on the relationship between the coordinates of an event as observed from a moving rocket and a stationary point P. It clarifies that when the rocket moves with velocity v and the event occurs at point P, the event's coordinate can be expressed as x' = -vt' in the rocket's frame. The coordinate of point P must be specified to determine whether x' is negative, which is possible if P is at rest in the unprimed frame. The use of Lorentz transformations is emphasized for accurate calculations. A specific example illustrates that with a velocity of 0.6, the coordinates yield a negative x' for event B.
Lotto
Messages
253
Reaction score
16
TL;DR
Observer S' is in a rocket that is moving relative to an observer S. Outside his rocket happened an event. How to construe the ##x'## of that event? Can be ##x'## negative?
I have a rocket and it is moving straight from a point P with a velocity ##v##. When I say that ##x'=0## is at the place we sit in the rocket, then when the event happened outside his rocket at the point P, can I say that the coordinate of the event is for him negative, so ##x'=-vt'##, although is it not in his stationary frame of reference?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It depends what the ##x## coordinate of ##P## is which you have not specified, and which frame you are considering ##P## to be at rest in. If ##x=0## and the point is at rest in the unprimed frame then your answer is correct. Generally, you need to use the Lorentz transforms.
 
Yes it can be negative

In the below space-time diagram enter .6 for velocity, 0 for x, 4 for t for event B.

You will see a negative x' for event B, x' = -3, t'=5

http://www.trell.org/div/minkowski.html
 
In Birkhoff’s theorem, doesn’t assuming we can use r (defined as circumference divided by ## 2 \pi ## for any given sphere) as a coordinate across the spacetime implicitly assume that the spheres must always be getting bigger in some specific direction? Is there a version of the proof that doesn’t have this limitation? I’m thinking about if we made a similar move on 2-dimensional manifolds that ought to exhibit infinite order rotational symmetry. A cylinder would clearly fit, but if we...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 87 ·
3
Replies
87
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
4K