Is there a way to "build" special relativity by using causality as one of the axioms? Or is it just a consequence of a fact that the speed of light is same in all reference frames?
2
-
6$\begingroup$ Well, what exactly do you mean by causality? $\endgroup$– David ZJul 28, 2015 at 16:37
-
$\begingroup$ Speed of light same in all frames of reference is postulate to special relativity. There is no assertion of fact. $\endgroup$– paparazzoJul 28, 2015 at 18:28
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
Not quite. Galilean relativity, which has absolute time, is definitely causal; you can't have future events influence past ones because all observers agree on all times.
However, it is interesting how much relativity you can get with incomplete axioms. There's a derivation on page 38 here that shows you can get the Lorentz transformations, but with a general $v$ in place of $c$, using just the postulate that inertial frames are equivalent. Then adding in the 'speed of light is same' axiom sets $v = c$. Like your causality thing, this doesn't rule out Galilean relativity because that's just the limit $v \rightarrow \infty$.
Given that, I'm not sure if just a "causality" axiom is enough to get equally far. Maybe you could argue that causality really is the same thing as "all inertial frames are equivalent", but I'm not sure about that.
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
Based on this post:
Is causality a formalised concept in physics
and the content within, the issue of causality seems to me to be a philosophical as much as a physical question. So I would guess there is no clearcut answer to your question.
Have a read, see what you think, and see will you end up as confused as everybody else seems to be regarding the issue.
