An Introduction to Special Theory of

Relativity

By Shubham Birange,

1st year UG, Electrical Engineering

Summer of Science

2017
Background History

Einsteins theory of special and general relativity has a formidable

reputation as being incredibly complicated .The principle of relativity
itself, the single, simple idea upon which Einsteins theory is based, has
been around since the time of Galileo. As we shall see, when it is applied
to objects that are moving extremely fast, the consequences seem
strange to us because they are outside our everyday experience; but the
results make sense and are all self-consistent when we think about them
carefully. We can summarize the major corrections that we need to
make to Newtons equations of motion as follows: Firstly, when an
object is in motion, its momentum p is larger than expected, its length l
shrinks in the direction of motion, and time t slows down, in each case
by a factor

where v is the velocity of the object and c is the speed of light: c =

299792458m/s.

Einstein wrote two theories of relativity; the 1905 work is known

as special relativity because it deals only with the special case of
uniform (i.e. non-accelerating) motion. In 1915 he published his general
theory of relativity, dealing with gravity and acceleration.

Galilean Relativity:
Though the transformations are named for Galileo, it is absolute time
and space as conceived by Isaac Newton that provides their domain of
definition. In essence, the Galilean transformations embody the intuitive
notion of addition and subtraction of velocities as vectors.

The notation below describes the relationship under the Galilean

transformation between the coordinates (x, y, z, t) and (x, y, z, t) of a
single arbitrary event, as measured in two coordinate systems S and S',
in uniform relative motion (velocity v) in their common x and x
directions, with their spatial origins coinciding at time t = t = 0:

x'=x-vt
y'=y
z'=z
t'=t.

The Clash with Electromagnetism:

Newtons laws reigned supreme in mechanics for more than 200 years.
However, difficulties arose in the mid-19th century with studies of
electromagnetism. All electrical and magnetic 17 effects could be
summarized nicely in Maxwells Laws, which we wont go into here. The
problem was that, unlike Newtons laws, these were not invariant under
a Galilean transformation the principle of relativity didnt seem to be
valid for electricity or magnetism.

In particular, the conflict became apparent where Maxwells Laws

predicted a constant speed of light, independent of the speed of the
source. Sound is like this; it moves through the air at the same speed,
regardless of the speed of the source. (The speed of the source changes
the frequency, or pitch, of the sound, via the famous Doppler effect, but
not its speed).

The Invention of the Ether:

Since, by the 1870s, Newtons Laws had stood the test of time for two
centuries, and Maxwells Laws, having a vintage of just 20 years or so,
were young upstarts, the natural assumption was that Maxwells Laws
needed some modification. The first obvious conclusion was that, just as
sound needed a medium to travel through and the speed was constant
relative to the medium so light must need a medium too. (Remember
that nobody had come across the idea of a wave without a medium until
then). The Victorian scientists named this medium the ether.

The Michelson-Morley Experiment:

If the Earth is really a spaceship moving through the ether, the speed
of light in the direction of Earths motion should be lower than it is in a
direction at right angles to this. By measuring these speeds, we should
therefore be able to detect Earths absolute velocity relative to the
ether. The most famous experiment that tried to do this was the
Michelson Morley experiment, in 1887. Here is how it works :

There is a light source at A. A glass plate at B is half-silvered, so half of

the light is reflected up to C (ignore the dashed lines for now), where it
hits a mirror and comes back down. The other half of the light carries on
through to E, where it also is reflected back. The two beams are
recombined on the other side of B, where they make interference
fringes (bright where crest meets crest, dark where crest meets trough).

Now, suppose the apparatus starts to move to the right at velocity

u. Suppose the time now needed for the light to go from B to E is t1. In
this time, mirror E has travelled distance ut1 to the right, so the total
distance the light has to go is

since the light is travelling at speed c.

 When it bounces back, B is moving in to meet it, so it has a shorter
distance to go; if it takes time t2, we have

Rearranging,

the total time for the round trip is

Now lets do the same calculation for the light that bounces off C. The
ray follows the hypotenuse of a triangle, and so travels the same
distance in each leg. If each leg takes time t3, and is therefore a distance
ct3, we have

Or
Since the return trip is the same length, the total round trip takes a time
of 2t3.

So, the times taken to do the two round trips are not the same. In
fact, the lengths of the arms L cannot be made exactly the same. But
that doesnt matter: what we have to do is to rotate the interferometer
by 90, and look for a shift in the interference fringes as we move
through the ether in the direction of first one, and then the other arm.
The orbital speed of the Earth is about 30 km/s. Any motion through the
ether should be at least that much at some time of the night or day at
some time of the year but nothing showed up! The velocity of the Earth
through the ether could not be detected.

The Lorentz Transformation:

Notice that the difference in travel times for the two arms of the
Michelson interferometer is a factor of

Lorentz suggested that, because all of the electrons in all of the

materials making up the interferometer (and everything else) should
have to interact with the ether, moving through the ether might make
materials contract by just this amount in the direction of motion, but not
in transverse directions. In that case, the experiment would give a null
result. (Fitzgerald had also noticed that this fix would work, but could
not suggest what might cause it). In developing this idea further, Lorentz
found that clocks that were moving through the ether should run slowly
too, by the same amount. He noticed that if, instead of the Galilean
transformations, he made the substitutions

Poincare and Einstein (Postulates of Special Theory of Relativity):

To everyone else, naturally, Lorentzs solution looked like an artificial
fudge, invented just to solve this problem. People continued to try to
discover an ether wind, and every time an explanation had to be made
up as to why nature was conspiring to thwart these measurements. In
the end, Poincare pointed out that a complete conspiracy is itself a law
of nature; he proposed that there is such a law of nature, and that it is
not possible to discover an ether wind by any experiment; that is, there
is no way to determine an absolute velocity. Poincares principle of
relativity (1904) states that:

The laws of physics should be the same in all reference frames which
move in uniform motion with respect to one another.

To this, Einstein added his second postulate:

The velocity of light in empty space is the same in all reference frames,
and is independent of the motion of the emitting body.
The second postulate as stated is not very general, and it implies that
there is something special about the behavior of light. This is not the
case at all. We should restate it as:

There is a finite speed that is the same relative to all frames of

reference.

The fact that light in vacuum happens to travel at that speed is a

consequence of the laws of electromagnetism and of the first postulate.
Let us re-emphasize: there is nothing particularly special about light that
makes it somehow magically change the properties of the universe. It is
the fact that there is a finite speed that is the same for all observers that
runs counter to our instincts, and that has such interesting
consequences. We will from now on assume that these postulates are
true, and see what experimental results we can predict from them. In
fact, as we stated earlier, relativity has passed every experimental test
that has ever been proposed for it. It is now so deeply ingrained in our
thinking that, unlike other laws or theories that apply to particular
branches of physics, relativity is used as a sort of check any theory that
we produce has to be consistent with relativity or else it is at best an
approximation.

Derivation of Lorentz Transformations:

We have seen that lengths and times are both modified when bodies are
in motion. We now derive the Lorentz transformations; this involves just
a little algebra; the procedure is entirely based on Einsteins two
postulates. Let us start with a fairly general set of linear transformations:
The distances and times correspond to measurements in reference
frames S, S.We have here assumed:
common origins (x = 0 at x = 0) at time t = t = 0.
linear transformations; there are no terms in, e.g., x2. To see that this
is reasonable, consider the point x = 0,which is the origin of the S
frame. It is moving with velocity

if there were x2 terms present, the speed would depend on position,

and the velocity would not be uniform.
Now, the origin of S (i.e., x = 0) moves with velocity v in the S frame,
so for x = 0,

Therefore, b = ev; but since we have b = av, we know that e = a. So far,

then,

Now we require light to travel with velocity c in all frames, in other

words x = ct is equivalent to x = ct.

Substitute for t:

Therefore,
Giving

The constant a we can guess from our previous look at time dilation and
space contraction... but here we derive it by requiring symmetry
between the observers. Suppose that we are sitting in the S frame,
looking at the S frame. We certainly expect the same relation to hold
true the other way around, if we swap

but we have to remember that the velocity is reversed:

So,

As both must hold simultaneously,

So

We normally give a the symbol :

and = v/c

The complete Lorentz transformations are therefore,

Notice, as usual, the limiting speed of light: if one frame moves faster
than light with respect to another, a becomes imaginary, and one or
other frame would then have to haveimaginary coordinates x, t.

Matrix formulation of Lorentz transform:

Time Dilation:
Imagine a simple clock, a light clock, consisting of light bouncing
between two mirrors separated by a distance l (see diagram). Each time
the light hits one of the mirrors, the clock gives out a tick. Let us make
a pair of these, and give one to our friend to take abord his spaceship,
while we keep
the other on Earth. The clock on the spaceship is mounted perpendicular
to the direction of motion, just like the ruler that we used last time.

A light clock, as seen in its rest frame (a) and from a frame (b) in which
it is moving with velocity v.

As our friend flies past, we watch the light bouncing between the
mirrors. But to us, instead of just going up and down, the light makes a
zigzag motion, which means that it has to go further. Between ticks,
therefore, whereas the light in our clock covers a distance l in time
t=l/c,
the light in the clock on board the spaceship covers a distance

which it must do in time

Substituting for l, we obtain

and therefore

So, if it takes time t for our clock to make a tick, it takes time t which
is always greater than t for the clock in the spaceship to make a tick. In
other words, it looks to us as though the moving clock runs slowly by a
factor . This is not just an illusion. Suppose instead we had a
pair of another type of clock (mechanical, quartz, a biological clock,
whatever), that we agree keeps time with our simple light clock. We
keep one on Earth, and check that it keeps time. Our friend takes the
other one along; but if he notices any discrepancy between the clocks,
then we have a way to tell who is really moving and that is not
allowed! Furthermore, while it appears to us that his clocks run slowly, it
appears to him that our clocks also run slowly, by exactly the same
reasoning! Each sees the other clock as running more slowly.
A time span as measured by a clock in its own rest frame is called the
proper time. This is not meant to imply that there is anything wrong with
the measurement made from another frame, of course.
Example of Time Dilation:
One early test was provided by looking at the lifetime of a particle called
the mu-meson, or muon. These are created in cosmic rays high in the
atmosphere, and they decay spontaneously after an average of about
2.2 106 s; thus, even travelling close to the speed of light, they should
not be able to travel more than about 600 m. But because they are
moving so close to the speed of light, their lifetime (as measured on the
Earth) is dilated according to equation, and they live long enough to
reach the surface of the Earth, some 10 km below... Muons have been
created in particle accelerators, and their lifetimes measured as a
function of their speed; the values are always seen to agree with the
formula.

Lorentz Contraction:
Consider one of the apparently long-lived muons coming down through
the atmosphere. In its rest frame, it is created at some time t = 0, at (let
us say) the origin of coordinates, x = 0. At some later time t (but at the
same spatial coordinate x = 0), the surface of the Earth moves up rather
quickly to meet it. If, say, t = 10-6 s, and v = 0.995c, the length of
atmosphere that has moved past it is vt = 300 m. But this is far less than
the 10 km distance separating the events in Earths frame! It seems that
not just time, but also length is changed by relative motion. To quantify
this, let the distance that the muon travels in Earths frame be x = vt;
note that, from the muons point of view, it is the Earth that is moving,
and so we use primes to denote Earths reference frame. The length of
atmosphere
moving past the muon in its rest frame is x = vt. Thus,
Therefore, the length of atmosphere x as measured by the muon is
contracted by a factor relative to the length measured on
Earth. Likewise, lengths in the muons rest frame are contracted as seen
by Earth-bound observers; but, because the muon is a point-like particle,
such lengths are difficult for us to measure directly.

Spacetime

Spacetime Events and World Lines:

We often represent space and time on a single spacetime diagram, with
time on the vertical axis (see diagram). An event is something that
happens at a given point in space and time, and is represented by a
point E (x, t) on a spacetime diagram.

Spacetime diagram of an event.

The path traced out by an object in a spacetime diagram is called its

world line.
 Spacetime diagram showing world lines of stationary and moving
objects.

A vertical line (A in diagram) represents a stationary object.

An object moving with velocity v is represented by a line at angle to
the horizontal (B in diagram), where
v = cot .
A light ray has cot = c; we usually measure x in units of ct (e.g.
light seconds), so = 45 for photons. Note that nothing can have a
world line with < 45.
Intervals:
Consider the quantity

The last three terms are the distance (squared) from the origin to the
point at which an event occurs; the first term is the distance that light
can travel in the available time. Let us evaluate the same quantity in
another frame of reference, moving with velocity v and having the same
origin when t = t = 0.
Therefore, the quantity S2, which is known as the interval, is the same in
all inertial reference frames; it is a Lorentz invariant. Remember this
its important, and very useful! The behaviour is very similar to the way
in which distance, in three-dimensional space, is invariant when we
rotate our coordinate axes; the interval stays unchanged when we move
from x, t to x, t axes via a Lorentz transformation. Spacetime can be
divided into three parts, depending upon the sign of the interval:

1. S2 > 0: Timelike (with respect to the origin). This class of events

contains x = 0, t = 0, which corresponds to changes in time of a clock at
the origin.

2. S2 < 0: Spacelike (with respect to the origin). This class contains t = 0,

x= 0 events, which are simultaneous with but spatially separated from
the origin.

3. S2 = 0: Lightlike (with respect to the origin). Rays of light from the

origin can pass through these events. Consider a spherical wavefront of
light spreading out from the origin; at time t it has radius r = ct, so it is
defined by the equation
which of course defines an interval S2 = 0. Naturally, in any other frame,
light also travels at speed c, so its wavefront must be determined by the
same equation, but using primed coordinates.
We can also define intervals between two events, instead of relating it
to the origin. In this case,

Simultaneity:
Lets look more closely at the Lorentz transformations. The first three
are just the same as the Galilean transformations, except that we have
the length contraction factor in the direction of motion x. The fourth
equation looks similar to the Galilean transformation t = t with the time
dilation factor but we now have an additional, unexpected term vx/c2.
If, in the spaceship, there are two events that are separated in space
suppose they occur at positions x1, x2 but at the same time t0, then
according to our observer on Earth, they occur at times

In that case, the events as seen from the Earth are no longer
simultaneous, but are separated by a time

This is known as failure of simultaneity at a distance, and it lies at the

heart of most of the problems and paradoxes of relativity. The whole
idea of simultaneity just breaks down: events (separated in space) that
are simultaneous in one reference frame are not in any other. As an
example, suppose the spaceship pilot is standing in the middle of his
spaceship, and he emits a flash of light which reaches both ends at the
same time. As seen by the man on Earth, though, the rear of the
spaceship is moving up to meet the light, whereas the front of the
spaceship is moving away from it; so the backwards-going pulse of light
reaches the rear of the spaceship before the forward-going pulse
reaches the front.

Note that from the point of view of a second rocket which is overtaking
the first, the first one is moving backwards, in which case the light will
hit the front mirror first. In order to appear simultaneous in all Lorentz
frames, a pair of events must coincide in both space and time in which
case they are really just one event.

The Principle of Causality:

Easily stated this is simply that
causes always occur before their resultant effects.

If A caused B, then A happened before B. Thats all. It prevents nasty

paradoxes: for example, you cant go backwards in time and prevent
your own birth, because if you did, you would never have been born,
and so you could not have travelled back and so on. We dont have any
proof of it; its just an observation of the way things seem to be. It keeps
life simple. But in relativity, it has an interesting consequence. Look
again at the rocket in the previous section. In its frame of reference,
light hits each mirror at the same time. In Earths frame, light hits the
back mirror first. In the frame of an overtaking rocket, light hits the front
mirror first. Suppose that, just as light hits the back mirror, a guard
standing beside it drops his sandwich; and just as light hits the front
mirror, the pilot, standing beside it, spills his coffee. Is it possible that
the guard dropping his sandwich caused the pilot to spill his coffee?
Although it might seem like it from the Earth, it clearly cannot be, since
from the overtaking rocket the pilot seemed to spill his coffee first. The
order of the sequence depends upon the frame of reference, and so
there is no cause and effect relationship. On the other hand, if one
event does cause another, it will occur first in all reference frames. This
can happen if and only if the interval between them is timelike or
lightlike; in other words, for one event to influence another there has to
have been enough time for light to propagate between them. Therefore,
it is clear that nothing no information can travel faster than the speed of
light. In fact,
If events are physically related, their order is determined absolutely.
If they are not physically related, the order of their occurrence
depends upon the reference frame.
(Physically related here means that information has had time to travel
between the events, not necessarily that one caused another).

The Light cone:

If we include another space dimension in our spacetime diagram, the
world line of light then defines a cone (actually a pair of cones), with
its vertex at the origin and an opening angle of 45.

Events at the origin can be related to events inside the cone, since
signals can travel between them at up to the speed of light; but an event
at the origin cannot be related to events outside the light cone. The
region inside the cone and above the origin is therefore known as the
absolute future, and that inside the cone below the origin is the absolute
past.
 A light cone

Dynamics and Kinematics

Lorentz Transformation of Velocities:

Consider an object moving with velocity u=uxx + uyy in reference frame
S. (Note that the transverse directions y and
z are equivalent). So,

In frame S, moving with velocity v along the x axis, the same

object will have velocity
Since,

We have

Therefore,

and, correspondingly,
Note that velocities in the transverse direction are altered.

Relativistic Dynamics:
As we pointed out at the beginning, our classical laws of conservation of
momentum and energy require modification in the relativistic limit.
However, we can obtain laws closely related to the originals if we allow
mass to vary with velocity in the way that we have allowed lengths and
times to vary.
We assume that
1. something that we shall call the total mass is conserved;
2. momentum (= mass x velocity) is also conserved.

We finally obtain

If we define a momentum
p = mv,

we see that
So,

Finally, note that if a particle is in a potential of some sort, its potential

energy of course must add to the expression for the total energy.

Consequences:
Equivalence of mass and energy. We postulated a conservation of
mass law, but it has turned out that mass and energy are the same
thing, just measured in different units (and related by the constant c2).
So the law has become equivalent to the conservation of energy.

Notice that the rest mass is not conserved. When the object of mass
M0 split up, it produced two objects each of so-calledmass (actually
times mass) mu; but the sum of the rest masses of the two fragments is
2m0, which is less than M0; the extra mass in M0 has been converted
into kinetic energy of the fragments. The same is true in reverse; if we
put two fragments of mass m0 together gently, we end up with an object
of mass 2m0 which is therefore a different object than we get if we
push the two fragments together hard, since the extra kinetic energy
turns into extra mass.

If an object splits up in this way, when the fragments interact

with material, they deposit energy (as heat, kinetic energy and so on)
until they come to rest. The total energy liberated then is