Abstract
A velocity-orientation formalism to deal with compositions of successive Lorentz transformations, emphasizing analogies shared by Lorentz and Galilean transformations, has recently been developed. The emphasis in the present article is on the convenience of using the velocity-orientation formalism by resolving a paradox in the study of successive Lorentz transformations of the electromagnetic field that was recently raised by Mocanu. The paradox encountered by Mocanu results from the omission of the Thomas rotation (or, precession) which is involved in the composition of two Lorentz transformations with corresponding noncollinear velocity parameters. By resolving this paradox, we expose (i) the central role that the Thomas rotation plays in special relativity, (ii) the need to consider in special relativity orientations in addition to velocities between inertial frames, and (iii) the power and elegance of the novel velocity-orientation formalism. A similar paradox in STR that Mocanu pointed out, also resulting from the omission of the Thomas rotation, has been resolved in a previous communication.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References and notes
Abraham A. Ungar, “Thomas rotation and the parametrization of the Lorentz transformation group,”Found. Phys. Lett. 1, 57–89 (1988).
Llewellyn H. Thomas, “The motion of the spinning electron,”Nature (London) 117, 514 (1926); “The kinematics of an electron with an axis,”Philos. Mag. 3, 1–22 (1927).
Llewellyn H. Thomas, “Recollections of the discovery of the Thomas precessional frequency,”AIP Conference Proceedings No. 95, High Energy Spin Physics, G. M. Bunce, ed. (Brookhaven National Lab, 1982), pp. 4–12.
George E. Uhlenbeck, “Fifty years of spin: Personal reminiscences,”Phys. Today 29, 43–48 (June, 1976).
John D. Jackson,Classical Electrodynamics, 2nd edn. (Wiley, New York, 1975).
Constantin I. Mocanu, “Some difficulties within the framework of relativistic electrodynamics,”Arch. Elektrotech. 69, 97–110 (1986).
Constantin I. Mocanu,Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies at Relativistic Velocities (Publ. House of Roum. Academy, Bucharest, 1985); “Hertzian alternative to special theory of relativity, I. Qualitative analysis of Maxwell's equations for motionless media,”Hadronic J. 10, 61–74 (1987), and references therein.
Abraham A. Ungar, “The relativistic velocity composition paradox and the Thomas rotation,”Found. Phys. 19, 1385–1396 (1989).
9.Ref. 1 and Abraham A. Ungar, “The Thomas rotation formalism underlying a non-associative group structure for relativistic velocities,”Appl. Math. Lett. 1, 403–405 (1988); “Axiomatic approach to the nonassociative group of relativistic velocities,”Found. Phys. Lett. 2, 199–203 (1989); “The relativistic noncommutative nonassociative group of velocities and the Thomas rotation,”Results Math. (Birkhäuser-Verlag)16, 168–179 (1989); “Weakly associative groups,”Results Math. (Birkhäuser-Verlag)17, 149–168 (1990); “The expanding Minkowski space,”Results Math. (Birkhäuser-Verlag)17, 342–354 (1990); “Group-like structure underlying the unit ball in real inner product spaces,”Results Math. (Birkhäuser-Verlag)18 (1990); “Thomas precession and its associated group-like structure,” preprint.
Abraham A. Ungar, “Quasidirect product groups and the Lorentz transformation group,” in T. M. Rassias, ed.,Constantin Caratheodory: An International Tribute (World-Scientific, Singapore, 1991).
Chris J. Isham,Lectures on Groups and Vector Spaces for Physicists (World-Scientific, Singapore, 1989), p. 44.
L. Silberstein,The Theory of Relativity (Macmillan, London, 1914), p. 168.
R. D. Sard,Relativistic Mechanics, Special Relativity, and Classical Particle Dynamics (Benjamin, New York, 1970), Chap. 5.
For recent attempts see, for instance, W. E. Baylis and George Jones, “Special relativity with Clifford algebras and 2 × 2 matrices, and the exact product of two boosts,”J. Math. Phys. 29, 57–62 (1988); Nikos Salingaros, “The Lorentz group and the Thomas precession. II. Exact results for the product of two boosts,”J. Math. Phys. 27, 157–162 (1986); Nikos Salingaros, “The Lorentz group and the Thomas precession. II. Exact results for the product of two boosts,”J. Math. Phys. 29, 1265 (1988); C. B. van Wyk “Rotation associated with the product of two Lorentz transformations,”Am. J. Phys. 52, 853–854 (1984).
See “fact (3)” on p. 246 in P. S. Farago, “Derivation of the spin-orbit interaction,”Am. J. Phys. 35, 246–249 (1967).
Jacques Tits, “Généralisation des groupes projectifs,”Acad. R. Belg. Cl. Sci. Mém. Coll. 5 e, Ser. 35, 197–208, 224–233, 568–589, 756–773 (1949).
Helmut Karzel,Inzidenzgruppen I, lecture notes by I. Pieper and K. Sörensen, University of Hamburg, 1965, pp. 123–135.
William Kerby and Heinrich Wefelscheid, “The maximal subnear-field of a neardomain,”J. Alg. 28, 319–325 (1974).
J. D. Jackson (Ref. 5), p. 541. OurB(v) is identical with Jackson'sB(-v). See also M. C. Møller,The Theory of Relativity (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1952; New York, Dover, 1981), p. 42. A simple derivation of the pure Lorentz transformation, in a vector form, may be found in W. Pauli,Theory of Relativity (Pergamon, New York, 1958), p. 10.
J. D. Jackson (Ref. 5), p. 551.
J. D. Jackson (Ref. 5), p. 550.
J. D. Jackson (Ref. 5), p. 552 with v replaced by -v. This replacement results from the fact that our pure Lorentz transformation is identical with Jackson's inverse pure Lorentz transformation, as remarked above (Ref. 19).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ungar, A.A. Successive Lorentz transformations of the electromagnetic field. Found Phys 21, 569–589 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00733259
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00733259