Why does v = 0 in the Lorentz Transformation equation?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Lorentz Transformation equations in the context of Einstein's theory of relativity, specifically addressing the condition under which the variable v equals zero. Participants explore the mathematical implications of this condition and its relation to the constancy of the speed of light.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation, Mathematical reasoning, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a mathematical derivation showing that the Lorentz equations yield a consistent result only when v=0, questioning the reasoning behind this condition.
  • Another participant agrees with the mathematical steps and suggests that multiplying the time equation by c leads to a direct relationship between ct1 and x1.
  • A third participant expresses appreciation for the mathematical insight shared by the second participant.
  • A later post reiterates the conclusion that the simplification to x1=ct1 occurs under the condition v=0, emphasizing the mathematical steps involved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the mathematical derivation presented, but there is no consensus on the underlying reasoning for why v must equal zero in this context.

Contextual Notes

The discussion does not resolve the broader implications of the condition v=0 or its physical significance within the framework of relativity.

xwolfhunter
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
So I've been reading Einstein's theory of relativity, and at one point when discussing the Lorentz equations' proof that light remains constant, he just states it without mathematically doing it. Probably because it wasn't the super scientific version (?) but I wanted to see how he did it, so I did it, but the only way it works out to exactly what it needs to be is if ##v=0##. So here's the math:
[tex]x^1=\frac{(c-v)t}{\sqrt{1- \frac{v^2}{c^2}}}[/tex]
[tex]t^1=\frac{(1-\frac{v}{c})t}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}[/tex]
This is after you state that [itex]x=cv[/itex] and then substitute it into the Lorentz equations. So then you solve for [itex]t[/itex], and get [itex]t=\frac{\Big(\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}\Big)t^1}{(1-\frac{v}{c})}[/itex]. Substituting [itex]t[/itex] into the other equation, and simplifying it, I end up with:
[tex]x^1=\frac{t^1(c-v)}{1-\frac{v}{c}}[/tex]
The only way it simplifies to [itex]x^1=ct^1[/itex] is if, as previously stated, [itex]v=0[/itex]. And I'm sure it does, but I just cannot figure out why. First I thought [itex]v=c[/itex], since that was what was being measured, but then I discarded it, since mathematically it made [itex]x^1=0[/itex]. If somebody could briefly explain why [itex]v=0[/itex], I would greatly appreciate it!

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
xwolfhunter said:
So here's the math:
[tex]x^1=\frac{(c-v)t}{\sqrt{1- \frac{v^2}{c^2}}}[/tex]
[tex]t^1=\frac{(1-\frac{v}{c})t}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}[/tex]
Multiply the second equation by c, and the right-hand side will be exactly the same as the right-hand side of the first equation, showing immediately that ct1 = x1.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Aha, that's beautiful! Thanks!
 
xwolfhunter said:
[tex]x^1=\frac{t^1(c-v)}{1-\frac{v}{c}}[/tex]
The only way it simplifies to [itex]x^1=ct^1[/itex] is if, as previously stated, [itex]v=0[/itex].
Or[tex]x^1=\frac{t^1(c-v)}{1-\frac{v}{c}}[/tex][tex]x^1=\frac{c\;t^1(c-v)}{c\;(1-\frac{v}{c})}[/tex][tex]x^1=\frac{c\;t^1(c-v)}{(c-v)}[/tex][tex]x^1=c\;t^1[/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • · Replies 120 ·
5
Replies
120
Views
10K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K