0
$\begingroup$

In Special Relativity we can consider spacetime to be the Minkowsky space $\mathbb{R}^{1,3}$ which is just $\mathbb{R}^4$ together with the non degenerate symmetric bilinear form $g$ that in some basis has the matrix $(g_{\mu\nu})=\operatorname{diag}(1,-1,-1,-1)$. In particular we can consider the path of a particle through this spacetime as simply a curve $\alpha : I\subset \mathbb{R}\to \mathbb{R}^{1,3}$.

Such a curve can be written as

$$\alpha(\tau) = (\alpha^0(\tau),\alpha^1(\tau),\alpha^2(\tau),\alpha^3(\tau))$$

With $\tau$ being the proper time (i.e. the time measured on the reference frame of the particle itself). In the classical language, one would refer to $\alpha$ as a position four-vector $\mathbf{R}=(ct,x,y,z)$. Following that classical line of thought we could simply in a non-rigorous way consider infinitesimal changes on the coordinates $dt,dx,dy,dz$ which induces a $d\mathbf{R}$ on the position. Dividing by $dt$ we would get

$$\dfrac{d\mathbf{R}}{dt}=\left(c,\dfrac{dx}{dt},\dfrac{dy}{dt},\dfrac{dz}{dt}\right).$$

If one wanted them how $\mathbf{R}$ changes as $\tau$ changes then we would do

$$\dfrac{d\mathbf{R}}{d\tau} = \dfrac{d\mathbf{R}}{dt}\dfrac{dt}{d\tau} = \gamma (c,\mathbf{v})$$

using time dilation $dt = \gamma d\tau$ and $\mathbf{v}$ as the usual velocity. Although this result is true I would like to know how to do it in the rigorous version. The problem in the rigorous version is that for $i=1,2,3$ the derivative of $\alpha^i$ with respect to $t$ is zero, because $\alpha^i$ is a function not defined on $\mathbb{R}^{1,3}$ where $t$ is a coordinate we can differentiate with respect to, it is defined in $I$ where we can only differentiate with respect to proper-time.

Indeed in the rigorous version this $\mathbf{v}$ doesn't seem to make sense, because it seems to be the derivatives of the $\alpha^i$ with respect to $t$.

So in the rigorous version, what is really this $\mathbf{v}$ and how does one show that $\alpha'(\tau) = \gamma(c,\mathbf{v})$?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ This is essentially what i posted in: physics.stackexchange.com/a/171121/75518 Note that I used an arbitray parametrisation of the path and just later introduced proper time etc. $\endgroup$ – image Mar 19 '15 at 19:06
  • $\begingroup$ Also: One does not in a non-rigorous way consider infinitesimal elements. Physicists tend to use that vague language in lectures without clear definitions. There's a exact sience about such stuff, called differential geometry. $\endgroup$ – image Mar 19 '15 at 19:25
1
$\begingroup$

Mathematically, since the coordinates $\alpha$ are functions of $\tau$, you can, assuming certain assumptions on the curve, reexpress the curve as a function from the time coordinate to the spacetime coordinates by writing $\alpha^\mu(t)=\alpha^\mu((\alpha^0)^{-1}(t))$, which is just a reparametrization of the curve from $\tau$ to $t$. The assumptions are in essence that the function $\alpha^0(\tau)$ be invertible, see last comment. They will always be satisfied, if you don't consider limit cases.

Now to prove that $\alpha'(\tau)=\gamma(c,\vec{v})$, you decompose the total derivative with respect to $\tau$ by expressing it via a function of $t$ as you have done and it is rigorous since we have defined the functions $\alpha^\mu(t)$.

Of course it wouldn't work when $\gamma \longrightarrow \infty$, but then you would be going at the speed of light.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

It is incorrect to say that we can only differentiate $\alpha^i$ with respect to proper time. We know that proper time is the parameter along the curve, i.e. a point $x$ on the curve is a function of the proper time $\tau$. This relation is given by the vector $\alpha=\alpha(\tau)$. However, we also have the relation $$\tau(x)=\int^x \mathrm{d}\tau$$ which is just the arc length formula for $\mathbb{R}^{3,1}$. Thus we can write $\alpha(x)=\alpha(\tau(x))$ and take derivatives with respect to coordinates. Note further the relation $$\eta_{\mu\nu}\frac{\mathrm{d}x^\mu}{\mathrm{d}\tau}\frac{\mathrm{d}x^\nu}{\mathrm{d}\tau}=1$$ which is to be solved for $\alpha^i$ in terms of $t$. Thus we can find the components of the curve all in terms of $t$, making the derivatives in the OP possible.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.