With the Lorentz-Einstein transformations in hands

In summary, the conversation discusses whether or not having the Lorentz-Einstein transformations means having all the fundamental equations of special relativity, the differences between Einstein's special relativity theory and Lorentz ether theories, and the meaning of IMHO (In My Humble Opinion). The participants also mention the LET (Lorentz-Einstein Transformations) and its use in understanding time dilation. One participant adds their opinion on the generality of LET and its relation to slow clocks.
  • #1
bernhard.rothenstein
991
1
Is it correct to say that having the Lorentz-Einstein transformations in our hands we have also all the fundamental equations of special relativity?
sine ira et studio
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Probably the answer should be no, since the lorentz transformation was known many years before relativity.
Special relativity is about making the whole physics (locally) invariant under the Lorentz transformation. The firt step to do that was to undestand its meaning.
 
  • #3
Bernhard.Rothenstein said:
Is it correct to say that having the Lorentz-Einstein transformations in our hands we have also all the fundamental equations of special relativity?
sine ira et studio
Yes IMHO.

While the onthology of Einstein's special relativity theory is different from Lorentz ether theories the numerical results are identical.
When two theories give exactly the same results it really becomes a "battle of religions" to argue which one is the right one.
 
  • #4
lalbatros said:
Special relativity is about making the whole physics (locally) invariant under the Lorentz transformation.

Is that meant to be globally? Isn't GR about local Lorentz invariance?
 
  • #5
As per the Erlanger program, knowing the Lorentz group amounts to knowing the geometry of Minkowski space -- but that's all it tells you. It doesn't tell you, for example, that 4-momentum is conserved.
 
  • #6
OK. So if we assume E-L equations too, then can translation symmetry imply 4-momentum conservation?
 
  • #7
Let

MeJennifer said:
Yes IMHO.

While the onthology of Einstein's special relativity theory is different from Lorentz ether theories the numerical results are identical.
When two theories give exactly the same results it really becomes a "battle of religions" to argue which one is the right one.

I fully aggree with you. As I see from the answers I have received I should add to my riddle that I mean by Lorentz-Einstein transformation an equation which establishes a relationship between the space-time coordinates of the same event detected from two inertial reference frames in relative motion ensuring the invariance of the expression xx-ctt, no more and no less. It has nothing to do with the debate between the two theories.
 
  • #8
Imho

MeJennifer said:
Yes IMHO.

While the onthology of Einstein's special relativity theory is different from Lorentz ether theories the numerical results are identical.
When two theories give exactly the same results it really becomes a "battle of religions" to argue which one is the right one.
Please let me know what do you mean by IMHO?
 
  • #9
bernhard.rothenstein said:
Please let me know what do you mean by IMHO?
IMHO = In My Humble Opinion :smile:
 
  • #10
Imho

Doc Al said:
IMHO = In My Humble Opinion :smile:
Thanks. When we speak about special relativity we all should start with IMHO.
 
  • #11
May I add an IMHO? Note that the LET is not general because an arbitrary constant has been omitted. That was OK in the 1905 paper because he was interested only in derivatives. Also I have not seen yet how slow clocks etc arise out of the LET.
 
  • #12
JM said:
May I add an IMHO? Note that the LET is not general because an arbitrary constant has been omitted. That was OK in the 1905 paper because he was interested only in derivatives. Also I have not seen yet how slow clocks etc arise out of the LET.
I assume by "LET" you are referring to the Lorentz-Einstein Transformations? Are you familiar with how they are used? What are you talking about with an "arbitrary constant"? Clocks "slowing" is a trivial consequence of the LT.
 

1. What are the Lorentz-Einstein transformations?

The Lorentz-Einstein transformations are a set of mathematical equations that describe how measurements of space and time change for observers in different frames of reference, particularly in the context of special relativity. They were developed by physicist Albert Einstein and mathematician Hendrik Lorentz in the early 20th century.

2. What are the applications of the Lorentz-Einstein transformations?

The Lorentz-Einstein transformations have many applications in modern physics, including explaining the behavior of particles at high speeds, reconciling the laws of electromagnetism with the principles of relativity, and predicting the effects of time dilation and length contraction.

3. How do the Lorentz-Einstein transformations relate to the theory of relativity?

The Lorentz-Einstein transformations are essential to the theory of relativity, particularly special relativity. They are used to describe how measurements of time and space change for observers in different inertial frames of reference, and are based on the principle that the laws of physics should be the same for all inertial observers.

4. Are the Lorentz-Einstein transformations applicable in all situations?

No, the Lorentz-Einstein transformations are only applicable in situations where the laws of physics are the same for all inertial observers. They do not apply in situations involving acceleration or non-inertial frames of reference.

5. How do the Lorentz-Einstein transformations differ from Galilean transformations?

The Lorentz-Einstein transformations take into account the principles of relativity and the constancy of the speed of light, while Galilean transformations do not. This means that the Lorentz-Einstein transformations are more accurate and applicable in situations involving high speeds, while Galilean transformations are more suitable for everyday, low-speed observations.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
20
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
101
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
10
Views
548
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
910
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
22
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
33
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
53
Views
4K
Back
Top