Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
in 1892.
The transformations
The covariance
Sources
The transformations
…if the form of a law is not changed by certain coordinate transformations , that
is, if it is the same law in terms of either set of coordinates , we shall call that law
(Introduction to the theory of relativity , Prentice Hall, New York 1946 p.10-11)
arises because both are forms of mathematical form preservation. But what is
particularly from the theory of transformations, but for physics, are related to
…..the transformation idea has more than historical interest. It plays a major
role in the present day study of physical laws. In fact , the use of vector analysis as a
descriptive language for physical sciences is largely based on the invariant properties of
“The motion of bodies included in a given space are the same among themselves
1
, whether the space is at rest , or moves uniformly in a right line without circular
Newtonian Universe.
Cartesian coordinate system with each reference frame.. The close relationship
of this principle for classifying geometries, to the demand that physical laws
the first unification of geometry and the Galilean transformations the first
uniformly and rectilinearly with respect to either system, the axes of the two
rectangular Cartesian coordinate systems are parallel (have the same orientation
(2) is invariant.
2
I. every body tends to remain in a state of rest of uniform rectilinear motion unless compelled to
change it’s state by action of an impressed force.
II . The “rate of change of motion”, that is the change of momentum , is proportional to the
impressed force and occurs in the direction of the applied force.
III. To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
Invariance and covariance in physics 4
invariance of acceleration.
transformation.
We say that the second law of motion (and hence all the three) are
Galilean invariant.
We shall study
of equation (2)
d
Fk (m k )......( 2΄ )
dt
under coordinate axis rotation. The two systems are in uniform
as before that at t=0 the origins coincide. The path of the of motion of one
Invariance and covariance in physics 5
frame with respect to the other is illustrated in figure 1 and the complete
transformation is given
x i
x i c ij x j i t wit h c ij .......... ..( 4)
x j
The transformation of (2) under (4) will result from the axis rotation,
x k
Multiplying (2΄) with and summating for κ we have
x r
x k d x d
Fk (m k k ) Fr (m r )......... .......( 5)
x r dt x r dt
Comparison (2΄) and (5) shows that the two terms of (2΄) undergo
coefficients c ij
x1 x 2 x 3
F F1 F2 F3 .......... ...( 6) .
x x x
Newtonian force and not of the fact that F satisfies the Newton equation of
motion.
an axis rotation to the same rule (of linear combination). The form of equation
(2΄) , is the same in (5), but it’s terms are altered by the
The law’s form expressed in the new symbols is independent of the orientation
rotating axes is described-, equation (2) is neither invariant nor covariant. The
get in the formula of transformation of the electric and magnetic three vectors
between two Galilean frames, under (now) the simple Lorentz transformation
transformations, and depends in no way on the fact that Frs satisfies Maxwell’s
change of the coordinate system, they co-vary with the system, but the laws of
transformation are such that if all the components are zero in the initial system
, they will be zero in every system. So a tensor equation holds in every system if
it holds in one.
This consideration expresses a basic idea of modern science. The system of the
tensor components is covariant , i.e it has a different numerical composition for each
coordinate system. Yet we express in this fashion a state that it is independent of the
components , since the components can be calculated for every coordinate system , if
they are known for one.. it is unfortunate that the physical terminology does not reflect
Invariance and covariance in physics 7
this well-defined mathematical distinction. (the philosophy of space and time p.236
Hans Reichenbach)
covariant form of the second law of Newton, where the description of the
namely, whereas one description gives only one component of the situation, it’s
geometrical similar scheme of this idol. We can study the properties of the
object in either of the two schemes, the similarity does not affect the causal
These as for philosophy but in physics there are different opinions for
invariance and covariance from Hamilton’s time till today, in Thomas Phipps book
demonstrated)was not an asset but a clue to imperfection of the form. Working from
this or other clues , Hamilton produced “canonical” forms of the mechanical equations
3
Einstein claimed that the coordinate transformations transformations (between two Lorentz
charts with a common origin) must be linear “on account of the properties of homogeneity which
we attribute to space and time.
Invariance and covariance in physics 8
that were genuinely invariant under a huge group of (so called “contact” )
subgroups. ..in consequence physics flowered into canonical mechanics , the Hamilton -
Jacobi equation and (a short step onward) the Schroedinger equation and quantum
mechanics……
in it’s form, only in the inertia frame of the observer- for his era in the frame
of the immovable ether – and nowhere else. In all others inertial frames their
terms alter , because alter the transformations , which now express different
ideas for space and time , than Newton’s. But the invariance was rejected from
Minkowski’s space-time.
cabin.
optical . But Maxwell’s equations were not invariant as were Newton’s, under the
equations had to change because this covariance was now the physical state of
the equations.
transformation.
Or
.΄ .......... .......... (8)
t t΄
So partial derivative with respect to t, as two of the four Maxwell
existed for electromagnetism (though not for mechanics) (b) that this ether
Maxwell’s equations , with total time derivatives? These were Hertz’s equations,
Newton’s equations are. But we had to change our views for the field.
Phipps claims that this definition is better than: “fields are mathematical
time derivatives with total time derivatives, where the total time derivative
inserts (8) a term proportional to some kind of velocity -the velocity υd of the
transformation generates a new term which cancels the velocity υd, that spoils
of the field abolishes the necessity for the Lorentz transformations for the
Lorentz covariance and the proper term for both is “invariance in form”.
p.96)
Sources: