Why does the Lorentz transformation only affect the x axis?

AI Thread Summary
The Lorentz transformation primarily affects the x-axis due to the nature of relative motion in special relativity, where velocity is considered only in the direction of travel. This is similar to the Galilean transformation, which also treats velocity as affecting only the x component. The discussion highlights the importance of understanding how to simulate objects moving at relativistic speeds, particularly in terms of visual perception and the effects of light travel time. To accurately represent a rocket moving near the speed of light, one must consider phenomena like length contraction and the Terrell effect. Overall, the transformation's focus on the x-axis is essential for simplifying calculations in relativistic contexts.
binarybob0001
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
I am now studying the Lorentz transformation which shares some commonality with the Galiliean transformation. What I'm confused about is how they only seem to transform the x axis. It will help if I write it out. The Galilean transformation looks like:
x' = x-vt
y' = y
z' = z
t' = t
Although most of the books I have read do not bother, I will put this in matrix form because I will eventually do that with the Lorentz transformation.
<br /> \left(\begin{array}{cccc}<br /> 1 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; -v &amp;<br /> 0 &amp; 1 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp;<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 1 &amp; 0 &amp;<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 1 <br /> \end{array} \right)<br /> \letf(\begin{array}{c}<br /> x &amp;<br /> y &amp;<br /> z &amp;<br /> t <br /> \end{array} \right) =<br /> \letf(\begin{array}{c}<br /> x&#039; &amp;<br /> y&#039; &amp;<br /> z&#039; &amp;<br /> t&#039;<br /> \end{array} \right)<br />
Pay no attention to the strange layout of the 1 by 4 arrays. I could not figure out how to make them. It is clear that veolocity effects only the x component of the resulting vector. To me that makes no sense. Does anyone know why it is set up this way. I have had no classes on matrices but I work with computer graphics programming and have taught myself much over the summer. I am thinking the book is assuming I also transform the coordinates of the object so that it is traveling only with respect to x and then transform the coordinate space back to the orginal for the final transformation. In that case giving the Lorentz transformation as first listed is not adaquate. Am I right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Thanks, I figured out what I needed to do based what was said before. I wanted to know how I simulate a view of a rocket moving at near the speed of light. This would all depend on the way you were looking and how much forshortning the rocket had in its direction of velocity. Although I haven't figured out how to keep track of the rockets displacement using matrices at the moment, I'm sure I'll get there.
 
binarybob0001 said:
I wanted to know how I simulate a view of a rocket moving at near the speed of light.

Note that if you want to simulate what the rocket actually looks like to the eye of an observer located at a particular point, you need to take into account the fact that light from different parts of the rocket takes different amounts of time to reach the observer's eye. For a start, see

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/penrose.html

then do a Google search on "Terrell rotation" and "Terrell effect" and you'll turn up some more information.
 
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Correct statement about a reservoir with an outlet pipe'
The answer to this question is statements (ii) and (iv) are correct. (i) This is FALSE because the speed of water in the tap is greater than speed at the water surface (ii) I don't even understand this statement. What does the "seal" part have to do with water flowing out? Won't the water still flow out through the tap until the tank is empty whether the reservoir is sealed or not? (iii) In my opinion, this statement would be correct. Increasing the gravitational potential energy of the...
Back
Top