0
$\begingroup$

Consider two consecutive boosts in $2+1$ dimensional spacetime, the first along the $x$-axis and the second along the $y$-axis. The net transformation is $$B_y(\theta_2)B_x(\theta_1)=\begin{pmatrix} \cosh\theta_2 & 0 & -\sinh\theta_2\\ 0 & 1 & 0\\ -\sinh\theta_2 & 0 & \cosh\theta_2 \end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix} \cosh\theta_1 & -\sinh\theta_1 & 0\\ -\sinh\theta_1 & \cosh\theta_1 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix}\hspace{1.89cm}\\=\begin{pmatrix} \cosh\theta_2\cosh\theta_1 & -\cosh\theta_2\sinh\theta_1 & -\sinh\theta_2\\ -\sinh\theta_1 & \cosh\theta_1 & 0\\ -\sinh\theta_2\cosh\theta_1 & \sinh\theta_2\sinh\theta_1 & \cosh\theta_2 \end{pmatrix}.$$ Since the product boost $B_y(\theta_2)B_x(\theta_1)$ can always be written as the product of a rotation and a boost, I can write $B_y(\theta_2)B_x(\theta_1)=R_z(\phi)B_{\hat n}(\theta)$. Here, $R_z(\phi)$ is the rotation matirx in the $xy$ plane and $B_{\hat n}(\theta)$ is some boost matrix. By brute force calculation, I find that $$B_{\hat n}(\theta)=R_z^{-1}(\phi)B_y(\theta_2)B_x(\theta_1)\\=\left( \begin{array}{ccc} 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & \cos\phi & \sin\phi\\ 0 & -\sin\phi & \cos\phi\\ \end{array} \right).\left( \begin{array}{ccc} \cosh\theta _2 & 0 & -\sinh\theta _2\\ 0 & 1 & 0 \\ -\sinh\theta _2 & 0 & \cosh\theta _2\\ \end{array} \right).\left( \begin{array}{ccc} \cosh\theta _1 & -\sinh\theta _1 & 0 \\ -\sinh\theta _1 & \cosh\theta _1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 \\ \end{array} \right)\\ ={\small \left( \begin{array}{ccc} \cosh\theta_1\cosh\theta_2 & -\cosh\theta_2 \sinh\theta_1 & -\sinh\theta_2\\ -\cos\phi\sinh\theta_1-\cosh\theta_1 \sin\phi\sinh\theta_2 & \cos\phi\cosh\theta_1+\sin\phi\sinh\theta _1\sinh\theta_2 & \cosh\theta _2\sin\phi\\ \sin\phi\sinh\theta _1-\cos\phi\cosh\theta _1\sinh\theta _2 & \cos\phi\sinh\theta _1\sinh \theta _2-\cosh\theta _1 \sin \phi & \cos\phi\cosh\theta_2\\ \end{array} \right)}$$

If boost matrices are always symmetric (the general form can be found here), why is $B_{\hat n}(\theta)$ calculated above is not symmetric? A pointing out my mistake will also be much appreciated.

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

As stated in other answers, you did in fact get a symmetric matrix, but only for some given values of $\phi$. One way to look at this is noticing you started off with two degrees of freedom ($\theta_1$ and $\theta_2$) but were finishing with three. By then $\textit{imposing}$ that the matrix you obtained is symmetric (as you know it must be), you can eliminate this extra variable. The way I found easier to achieve this is by comparing the entries $B_{23}$ and $B_{32}$:

\begin{equation} \sin(\phi) \cosh(\theta_2) = \cos(\phi)\sinh(\theta_1) \sinh(\theta_2) - \sin(\phi) \cosh(\theta_1), \end{equation} which leads to

\begin{equation} \phi_{boost} = \arctan\left(\frac{\sinh(\theta_1) \sinh(\theta_2)}{\cosh(\theta_1) + \cosh(\theta_2)}\right) \end{equation}

It's not that hard to also check that this value also makes the rest of the matrix symmetric.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Since this is a homework-like question, it would have been better not to provide a complete answer. $\endgroup$ – G. Smith Jul 21 at 4:17
  • $\begingroup$ Why did you put “boost” as a subscript on $\phi$? It’s a rotation angle, not a boost parameter. $\endgroup$ – G. Smith Jul 21 at 4:19
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry. It wasn't tagged as homework, though. About the subscript, it's the angle of a rotation generated by boosts. I agree it may be misleading, I just couldn't think of something better. $\endgroup$ – Lucas Baldo Jul 21 at 4:25
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @LucasBaldo Thanks. I appreciate your help. The mistake was that I was thinking that for any value of $\phi$, $B_n$ will be symmetric which is obviously wrong. Thank you very much. $\endgroup$ – mithusengupta123 Jul 21 at 4:55
1
$\begingroup$

Just because a matrix isn’t obviously symmetric doesn’t mean it isn’t symmetric. Given $\theta_1$ and $\theta_2$, there is a $\phi$ which makes the final matrix above symmetric. For example, when $\theta_1$ and $\theta_2$ are rapidities corresponding to boosts to speed $0.500c$, $\phi$ is $0.143$. Put in the numbers and see.

The general algebraic solution for $\phi$ is a common homework problem for students learning about the Wigner rotation, so I am not going to provide it, in accordance with the site’s policies.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$

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.