Lorentz-Einstein equation and Sturm Liouville Theory

  • Thread starter Thread starter member 11137
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Theory
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around the potential of developing an essay that explores the Lorentz-Einstein equation (LEE) through the lens of differential equations and Sturm-Liouville theory. The original poster seeks to determine if it is feasible to reformulate the LEE as a second-order differential equation by finding a suitable change of basis. They also mention a previous encounter with Connectivity Theory, which yielded similar mathematical results through different methods. A participant provides a specific formulation of the LEE, involving volumetric density and Lorentz force. The conversation emphasizes the intersection of advanced mathematical theories with physics, inviting constructive feedback on the proposed research direction.
member 11137
I first want to excuse me if it is the wrong place to post my question and if it is forbidden to ask such question on this forum because I know that personal research are not specially wellcome here. I don't want to disturb; I just want to learn more.
The question is: does it make sense to developp an essay in which I would try to recognize a set of four differential equations in observing the Lorentz-Einstein equation (LEE)? With other words does it make sense to look for a change of basis that would allow to read this LEE as a diff equ of second order ? And if I find one of these basis where it seems to be possible, is it correct to analyze the new formulation of the LEE with the Sturm Liouville Theory ?
One year ago I discovered the Connectivity Theory and I remarked that this latter obtain similar mathematical results than my approach, but through other ways.
Thank you for constructive remarks. Blackforest
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What do you call "the Lorentz-Einstein equation"?

Seratend.
 
On the left hand: ro. Du/ds where ro is the volumetric density of matter, u is the 4-speed vector, D the total derivative along the path s; on the right hand: [F].j the Lorentz force where [F] is the strenght field tensor and j the Lorentz current. Sorry I don't work with Latex or similar useful program (I will try to learn).
 
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K