<<

Passive Lorentz Transformations with Algebra

Carlos R. Paivaa

Instituto de Telecomunicações,

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Instituto Superior Técnico

Av. Rovisco Pais, 1, 1049-001 Lisboa, Portugal

In , (STA) provides a powerful and insightful

approach to an formulation of . However, in this of

spacetime, relativistic physics is usually considered a misnomer: STA provides us with

an invariant (coordinate-free) formulation and hence it seems that (passive) Lorentz

transformations are misplaced. However, in order to interpret experimental results, it is

important to relate invariant physical quantities to some reference frame. In this paper,

passive Lorentz transformations are derived using STA but without Einstein’s second

postulate on the speed of . This derivation sheds light on the physical background of

STA and, at the same , clarifies Lorentz transformations in the proper setting of

(Minkowski) four-dimensional spacetime.

000000, 0330+p, 0140-d, 020000

a e-mail: [email protected]

1 I. Introduction

As argued by David Mermin, special relativity should be included in the high school curriculum.1 In a first exposure to relativity one should stress the physical aspects without

using the Lorentz transformations. At some point, nevertheless, it is inevitable to

establish these transformations. However, there are two radically opposite ways of

deriving them: either with or without Einstein’s second postulate on the .

One of the most famous derivations using the second approach is due to Lévy-Leblond.2

Apart from its intrinsic physical significance, Maxwell equations represent a landmark in

physics that prompted some of the most important developments, both in physics and in

mathematics, that took place ever since.3 Special relativity is undoubtedly a consequence

of those scientific advances – although, from an epistemological perspective, one should

consider its foundations as independent from . On the other hand, it is

possible to derive Maxwell equations using a metric-free approach by using the calculus

of exterior differential forms.4

Special relativity suggested the following words from : «Henceforth by itself, and time by itself, are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality.»5 The spacetime algebra

(STA) developed, among others, by David Hestenes is, from the author’s viewpoint, the

most adequate mathematical language to express that union.6 7 8 9 10 However, when studying STA the Lorentz transformations are almost always assumed as a given. As far as the author knows, the derivation of the using STA can only be

2 found in Chapter 9 of Ref. 7. Nevertheless, that derivation doesn’t fit together with later

approaches to STA as presented in Ref. 9 or in Chapter 5 of Ref. 10. In fact, STA

provides an invariant (coordinate-free) formulation of physics through an elegant and

concise manipulation of active Lorentz transformations, trying to explain ab initio that

coordinates should be avoided. However, to overcome the coordinate “virus”, it is

important to be able to translate and dissolve passive Lorentz transformations in the

fluidity and flexibility of STA, thereby bridging the gap between relativistic physics and

proper spacetime physics. Furthermore, in order to interpret experimental results it is

necessary to relate invariant physical quantities to some reference frame. In this paper the

Lorentz transformation is derived without Einstein’s second postulate on the speed of

light using STA, i.e., working with vectors in a four-dimensional (flat) spacetime. The

main purpose is to emphasize the physical background rather than a complete

mathematical formulation, clarifying the four-dimensional setting of Lorentz

transformations.

II. The Geometric Product of Vectors

The elementary three-dimensional vector analysis developed by Gibbs is inappropriate to study special relativity. In fact, an a in spacetime belongs to a M with four and hence we cannot use the cross product of vectors, only defined in three dimensions, to multiply vectors in spacetime. Therefore, a new product between

vectors should be defined when working with vectors in M . In an inertial (non-

accelerating) frame S , the event (or vector) a can de described by its four rectangular

coordinates ()κ txyz,,, ∈ \4 as follows:

3 at=+=++()κ e,0123rr xyz e e e. (1)

Here κ is just an appropriate constant (with the of ) that transforms

units of time into units of length; no other meaning is ascribed a priori to it. The

coordinates in \4 correspond to the relativistic viewpoint, whereas a belongs to the so-

called Minkowski spacetime (or ) M that corresponds to proper spacetime physics. However, in another frame S moving away from S , the same event aM∈ is

described by the new coordinates (κ txyz,,,) in the new (f,f,f,f0123) :

at=+=++()κ f,0123rr xyz ff f. (2)

A rest point P in frame S is described by the line atPP( ) = (κ t)e0 + r where rP is a constant vector (t is the of S ). We always consider orthogonal bases, with

eeµν⋅= 0 as long as µ ≠ν . Therefore rP is a spatial vector orthogonal to the time vector

e0 . Henceforth we always consider

22 ee10 ==0 , (3)

22 although the choice ee0 ==−0 1 was also possible. Similarly, a rest point Q in frame S

is described by the atQQ( ) = (κ t)f0 + r where rQ is also a constant vector ( t

is the proper time of S ). The world line of point Q , from the perspective of frame S ,

should be atQQ()=+ (κ t )e0 r () t. The of point P is udadt10==P κ e ,

whereas the proper velocity of point Q is udadt20= Q = κ f . From Eqs. (3), one has

222 uu12==κ . Moreover, as udadtdtdt2 = ( Q )( ) ,

4 uu21=+γ ()v , (4)

with γ = dt dt and vr= ddtQ . Introducing also v = v ee11= β κ (with β = v κ ),

2 2 where e1 is a with either e11 = or e11 = − (to be determined later), then

fee001=+γβ(). (5)

When β > 0 , the moving frame is receding (according to the observer’s frame); when

β < 0 , the moving frame is approaching (also according to the observer’s frame).

To proceed our derivation we introduce now the geometric product between spacetime vectors ()ab, 6 ab, with ab, ∈ M. We define this product as associative, (left and right) distributive over addition, and obeying to the so-called contraction aaa2 =∈\ . It is this last property that distinguishes the geometric product from a general associative algebra.

We do not force the contraction to be positive, just a . The geometric (or

Clifford) product ab can be decomposed into a symmetric inner product ab⋅ and an antisymmetric outer product ab∧ , as follows:

11 a⋅= b() ab + ba, a ∧= b() ab − ba . (6) 22

The inner product returns a ab⋅ =⋅ ba, whereas the outer product returns a ab∧=−∧ ba. To show that ab⋅ ∈ \ is easy: from ()a+ b2 =+++ a22 b ab ba we have 2()()ab⋅=+ a b2 −− a22 b, so that ab⋅ is indeed a real number. Vectors can be pictured as directed line segments; , on the other hand, provide a means of encoding an oriented . Hence, the geometric product can be defined as a multivector that, according to Eq. (6), is given by

5 ab=⋅+∧ a b a b . (7)

The sum (or multivector) in Eq. (7) looks strange at first: usually one should only add objects of the same type. In fact, the right-hand side of Eq. (7) should be viewed in the same way as the addition of a real and an imaginary number: the result is neither a real number nor a pure imaginary number – it is a graded sum forming a .

From Eq. (7), ab= ba if and only if ab∧ = 0 (a and b are parallel); ab=− ba if and only if ab⋅=0 (a and b are orthogonal). Multivectors can be broken up into terms of different grade: the scalar part is assigned grade 0, the vector grade 1 and bivectors grade

2. We denote the projection onto terms of a chosen grade r by , so that in Eq. (7) we r have ab⋅= ab and ab∧= ab. As 0 2

()(a∧=−⋅⋅− b2 abab )() ab ba (8) =⋅()()a b ab + ba − a22 b −⋅ () a b 2 we get

()()ab∧=⋅−22 ab ab22 (9) and hence ()ab∧∈2 \ .

Using the geometric product it is now possible to present Eqs. (4) and (5) as follows

2 uLu21= , (10)

LB2 =+γ ()1 β ˆ , (11)

ˆ B = ee10, (12)

6 ˆ with u20= κ f and u10= κ e . One should note that B = ee10=∧ e 1 e 0 as ee10⋅= 0.

Bivector B = β Bˆ completely characterizes the between frames S and

22 22 S in spacetime. Hence, uu21== Lu 1 Lκ . Then

2 L = fe00, (13)

ˆ so that, according to Eq. (11), fe00⋅ = γ and fe00∧=γβB . We call the transformation

LS: → S, where L2 is given by Eq. (13), a boost (one should note that L2 is a multivector, not a simple bivector). Then, using Eq. (9), we get

2 222ˆ 2 ()fe00∧=γβB =− γ 1 from Eqs. (3). Hence,

1 γ = . (14) 1− β 22Bˆ

However, as ee10=− ee 01,

ˆ 2222 B ==−=−()()ee10 ee 10 e 1 e 0 e 1 (15) and hence either Bˆ 2 =−1 or Bˆ 2 =1. The reverse of a product of vectors is defined by

()ab† = ba . (16)

ˆˆ† Therefore, from Eqs. (12) and (11), one has B ==−ee01 B and

2 † ˆ ()LB==−ef00 γ () 1 β , respectively. Accordingly, from Eq. (13), we obtain

2 † ef00= ()L , or

eff001=−γβ(), (17) where, according to the ,

ˆˆ ff10=∴==BB eeff 1010. (18)

7 Then, from Eqs. (5) and (17), we get fee1=+γ ⎡ γγβ22 − ⎤ or, using Eq. (14), 110⎣ ( ) ⎦

ˆ 2 fe11=+γβ()B e 0. (19)

ˆ Using Eqs. (14) and (15), one gets indeed B ==ee10 ff 10, according to Eqs. (5) and (19).

Hence the velocity of S , from the perspective of an observer in S , is v = β κ e1 .

Likewise the velocity of S , from the perspective of an observer in S , is w =−β κ f1 as

uu12=+γ ()w in a similar way as Eq. (4) was derived. One should note that, in the

Galilean limit, β = 0 and γ = 1 in Eq. (14) and hence we get, from Eq. (19), fe11= and wv=− as β κ = v (although κ = ∞ and β = 0 in this limit). In summary: using Eqs. (5)

and (19), we know how it is possible to obtain the pair (f,f01) in S from the pair ()e,e01 in S , according to a Lorentz transformation LS: → S corresponding to a relative characterized by bivector B = β Bˆ , as shown in Fig. 1.

S S L(β ) u = κ e u = κ f 10 20 uu21= γ ()+ v uu12=+γ ()w

v = βκe1 w =−βκf1

Fig. 1. The Lorentz transformation (or boost) L transforms the pair ()e,e01 in

frame S into the pair ()f,f01 in frame S . In spacetime the relative motion between the two frames is completely characterized by bivector B = β Bˆ , where

ˆ B ==ee10 ff 10 and β = v κ .

8

II. Passive Lorentz Transformations

To complete the derivation of the Lorentz transformation within the STA it is necessary to know, in Eqs. (15), whether Bˆ 2 =1 or Bˆ 2 = −1.

S2

u20= κ f v = β κ f 221 L β L22(β ) 11() w111=−β κ f

S S 1 3 u10= κ e u30= κ g v = β κ e w =−β κ g 111 L (β ) 221 v = β κ e 33 w =−β κ g 331 331

Fig. 2. The relative motion between frames S2 and S1 is characterized by bivector

ˆ ˆ B11= β B , between frames S3 and S2 by B22= β B and between S3 and S1 by

ˆ ˆ B33= β B . One has B ===ee10 ff 10 gg 1 0.

Let us consider three frames: S1 , S2 and S3 . A rest point in frame Sk (with k = 1,2,3 )

has a proper velocity uk with: u10= κ e in S1 ; u20= κ f in S2 ; u30= κ g in S3 . The

ˆ relative motion between S2 and S1 is characterized by a relative velocity B11= β B ; the

ˆ relative motion between S3 and S2 by B22= β B ; the relative motion between S3 and S1

9 ˆ by B33= β B . This situation is shown in Fig. 2 where, according to Eq. (11),

2 ˆ LBkk=+γβ()1 k with βkk= v κ . For an observer in S1 , frames S2 and S3 are moving

away with v111= β κ e and v331= β κ e , respectively; for an observer in S2 ,

frame S3 is moving away with velocity v221= β κ f . The physical problem is usually put

as follows: given v1 and v2 , one wishes to determine v3 in terms of v1 and v2 . Only when all the relative take place along the same spatial direction, do we have, as

in Fig. 2, v1 and v2 in S1 both aligned along e1 . Then, using Eqs. (5) and (19),

ˆ 2 fee,fe010111111=+γβ() =+ γβ( B e 0) , (20)

gffee020213031=+=+γβγβ()(). (21)

Therefore, from Eqs. (20) and (21), we get

β + β β = 12. (22) 3 ˆ 2 1+ ββ12B

ˆ 2 2 For B =−1 and from Eq. (22), β3 =−21ββ( ) if β12= ββ= . Hence, β3 =1 for

β =−21 and β3 =∞ for β = 1; moreover, β3 < 0 if β > 1. However, Eq. (22) is not acceptable on physical grounds: the composition of two velocities in the same spatial

direction (e.g., β1 =1 and β2 = 2 ) cannot lead to a velocity in the opposite direction

ˆ 2 ()β3 =−3 . Therefore, one should rule out the possibility of having B =−1 and always choose, according to Eq. (15),

ˆ 22 B =−e11 = . (23)

This means that Eq. (22) should reduce to

10 β + β 12 vv12+ β 33=∴=v 2 . (24) 11++β12βκvv 12

This last equation states the existence of a natural bound for velocities: there is an upper limit κ , to be determined through experience, for all particle velocities. Only when

κ =∞ do we recover the Galilean limit vvv312= + . The fact that κ <∞, however, can only be inferred from experimental evidence.

From Eqs. (23), the Lorentz transformation corresponding to Fig. 1, can be stated in the condensed form

22 ef0066==LL e,ef 011 e 1, (25) according to Eqs. (5), (11) and (19). Furthermore, from Eqs. (14) and (23),

1 γ = . (26) 1− β 2

Then, as β ≤1, it is possible to define a parameter ζ , called , such that

−1 11⎛⎞+ β ζβ==tanh() ln ⎜⎟. (27) 21⎝⎠− β

Hence, using Eq. (11), we obtain

LB2 =+γ ()1coshsinhβζζˆˆ =() + B () (28) or, as Bˆ 2 =1 and

∞ 1 n exp()ζ BBˆˆ==+∑ ()ζζζ cosh() B ˆ sinh (), (29) n=0 n!

2 ˆˆ⎛⎞1 LBLB==exp()ζζ , exp⎜⎟, (30) ⎝⎠2

11 ††⎛⎞1 ˆ LBLL=−exp⎜⎟ζ ∴ = 1. (31) ⎝⎠2

Thus Eqs. (25) can be rewritten in the more symmetrical form

†† ef0066==LL e,ef 0 11 LL e 1, (32)

† † ˆˆ ˆˆ since LLee00= and LLff11= as BBeee001= −= and BBfff110= −=, respectively.

All the necessary tools inside STA to derive the Lorentz transformations are now at one’s disposal. Returning to Eqs. (1) and (2), it is now possible to rewrite them in the form

at=+++=+++()κκeeee0123 xyz( t) ffff 0123 xyz. (33)

ˆ However, as vectors e2 and e3 are orthogonal to bivector B = ee10=∧ e 1 e 0, they remain

unchanged in a Lorentz transformation, i.e., fe22= and fe33= . Hence, from Eqs. (33), we obtain

22 ()κκtxee01+=() tLxL() e 0 +( e 1) . (34)

Finally, using Eqs. (11), we get the passive Lorentz transformation

⎧ κγκβttx=+() ⎪ ⎪ x =+γβκ()xt ⎨ . (35) ⎪ yy= ⎪ ⎩ zz=

† The inverse transformation LS:;f,fe,e→ S( 01) 6 ( 0 1) is obtained using Eqs. (32):

†† fe0066==LL f,ff 0 10 LL f 1. (36)

12

IV. Concluding Remarks

In this paper the Lorentz transformation was derived without using Einstein’s second postulate on the speed of light, thereby showing that special relativity is independent from electromagnetism. This approach is more epistemologically sound than the conventional one which relies on the fact that the speed of light c (in a vacuum) is the same for all inertial observers. That, in Eqs. (24) and (35), one may write κ = c is a result from electromagnetic theory and hence strictly outside the scope of special relativity.

Ultimately, even if the was different from zero the special remained a consistent framework.

The derivation of the Lorentz transformation herein presented should not be considered within the context of a first exposure to relativity: the derivation refrained from glancing furtively at the doubters – something that cannot (and should not) be done at an introductory level. Nevertheless, the emphasis was not on the mathematical framework of

STA but rather on the physical setting of Lorentz transformations in the four-dimensional

Minkowski spacetime.

1 N. David Mermin, It's About Time: Understanding Einstein's Relativity (Princeton

University Press, Princeton, 2005).

2 J-M. Lévy-Leblond, AJPIAS 44 (3), 271-277 (1976).

13

3 , The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the

(Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 2005), Chap. 19, pp. 440-470.

4 Friedrich W. Hehl and Yuri N. Obukhov, Foundations of Classical Electrodynamics:

Charge, Flux, and Metric (Birkhäuser, Boston, 2003).

5 H. Minkowski, “Space and time,” in The Principle of Relativity, by H. A. Lorentz, A.

Einstein, H. Minkowski, and H. Weyl (Dover, New York, 1952), p. 75.

6 D. Hestenes and G. Bobczyk, to Geometric Calculus: A Unified

Language for Mathematics and Physics (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1984).

7 D. Hestenes, New Foundations for Classical , 2nd edition (Kluwer

Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1999).

8 D. Hestenes, AJPIAS 71 (2), 104-121 (2003).

9 D. Hestenes, AJPIAS 71 (7), 691-714 (2003).

10 C. Doran and A. Lasenby, Geometric Algebra for (Cambridge University

Press, Cambridge, 2003).

14