4 ms·
In 1987 my physics professor presented this proof to our class -- I always wondered why this elegant derivation of the Lorentz transform was not more widely use
by fuzzieozzie 3y ago
In 1987 my physics professor presented this proof to our class -- I always wondered why this elegant derivation of the Lorentz transform was not more widely used in undergrad physics education.
- abdullahkhalids 3y agoAs a first introduction, its more instructive to develop physical theories from physical postulates (like speed of light is constant), rather than constraining possible theories using more abstract mathematical principles. Undergrads will not appreciate the latter, as much as they will the first. Especially, because in the third semester, where relativity is first introduced, most physics undergrads don't know any group theory.
- lanstin 3y agoI wonder if we taught Emmy Noether’s theorem in tenth grade if people would love physics more.
- LudwigNagasena 3y agoThe contradiction between Maxwell’s electrodynamics and Newtonian mechanics was the raison d'etre of the relativity foundations laid out by Lorentz, Poincaré and Einstein. And since those subjects are usually studied before the theory of relativity, I think it makes sense to piggyback on them and use the historical reasoning to build the intuition behind relativity.