Concept

Invariance — where it appears

The property of a quantity that every observer agrees about, whatever frame or convention they are using to describe the rest. Distinguishing an invariant from a component is the single most useful discipline in relativity, since almost every apparent paradox is the two being confused.

Named by 12 essays across 3 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

Which happened first, asked of several observers. Two events on a spacetime diagram: one at the origin and one 3 light-seconds away and 1 second later, so that light leaving the first cannot reach the second. Through the second event runs a family of lines, each one the set of events some observer calls simultaneous with it; an observer moving at a fraction β of the speed of light has such a line of slope β on these axes. Where a line meets the vertical axis is the time that observer assigns to the second event. For a slow observer that meeting point is above the origin and the second event happens later; for a fast one it is below and the second event happens EARLIER. The changeover is at β = 0.3333, which is the time separation divided by the space separation, and it is a legal speed only because the separation is spacelike. So the order of these two events is not a property of the events. What every observer does agree on is that neither could have caused the other, because the two lie outside each other's light cones — drawn here as the diagonals — and that agreement is what causality rests on rather than on any shared notion of before.

Which came first, and who decides

Two events far apart can happen in either order, depending on who is asked, and both answers are correct. That is not a loophole in causality but the reason causality survives at all — because the pairs whose order is negotiable are exactly the pairs neither of which could have caused the other.

relativity · Simultaneity
A cube photographed at four speeds. The outline a camera records of a cube passing at β = 0, β = 0.4, β = 0.7, β = 0.9, moving to the right, seen at the moment it passes. The dashed square is what the usual picture shows: the cube flattened along its motion by the Lorentz factor. It is not what the camera gets. Light from the far face left earlier than light from the near face, by the time it needed to cross the extra distance, and the cube moved in that interval — so the far face appears displaced backwards and the side of the cube comes into view. The two effects together are exactly a rotation: at β = 0.4 the cube photographs as one turned 23.6°, at β = 0.7 the cube photographs as one turned 44.4°, at β = 0.9 the cube photographs as one turned 64.2°. The contraction has not gone anywhere — a ruler laid alongside still reads 43.6 per cent of the proper length at the highest speed drawn — but it is a statement about two positions at one time, and a photograph is not that.

The contraction no photograph shows

Every textbook picture of a relativistically moving object drawn between 1905 and 1959 showed it squashed. A camera would have shown it turned. The contraction is entirely real in the measurement that defines it, and a photograph is not that measurement.

relativity · Length contraction
Six observers, six energies, one loss. The kinetic energy of the same collision before and after it, as measured by observers moving at 6 different speeds. No two of them agree about how much energy there was: the totals here range from 5.50 to 25.50 in the same units. Every one of them agrees about how much was lost — the gap between the two curves is 3.413 for all of them, varying by 6.2e-15. Energy is a quantity an observer owns; a change in it is not, and that is why heat, deformation and sound can be counted at all.

The energy that depends on the observer

A moving train has kinetic energy. Watched from a second train alongside it, it has none. Both statements are correct, neither can be corrected, and the whole of mechanics still works — because what conservation laws constrain is not how much energy there is but how much of it changes.

mechanics · Energy
Pushing one way and going another. The angle between an applied force and the acceleration it produces, against the angle between the force and the body's velocity, at four speeds. At 0° and 90° the two are parallel, because those are the two directions the γ³ and γ divisors do not mix. Everywhere between, they are not: at 0.99c the worst case is 73.9°, reached with the force at 8.0°. A body under a steady sideways-ish push does not travel along it.

The push that does not point where the body goes

Newton's second law survives relativity in the form F = dp/dt and in no other. Written as F = ma it fails outright, and not merely by a factor — at high speed a body pushed at forty-five degrees accelerates at eighty, because the same force is divided by γ³ along the motion and by γ across it.

relativity · Relativistic dynamics
What a boost can and cannot do to a field. The electric and magnetic magnitudes of three fields, plotted against each other as the observer is boosted from -0.98c to 0.98c across them. Each field slides along a hyperbola, because E² − c²B² does not change: the recomputed value drifts by at most 2.6e-15 over every point drawn. The diagonal is E = cB, and which side of it a field starts on is permanent. Below it there is a speed at which the electric field vanishes; above it, one at which the magnetic field does; on it, a wave that no observer can slow, dim or unbalance.

The field nobody can transform away

A wire's magnetic field is an electric field seen from the wrong frame, and a charged plate's electric field is a magnetic one seen the same way. Neither trick works on a light wave. Two combinations of E and B are the same for every observer, and which side of one line a field sits on is a fact nothing about the observer can alter.

relativity · Field transformation
One expression over 3 decades of area times rate. Sagnac time difference against the product of enclosed area and rotation rate, both logarithmic. The relation Δt = 4AΩ/c² is linear in that product — the fitted slope of the drawn points is 1.0000 — and it contains no refractive index, no shape of the loop and no position of the axis inside it. a 1 km fibre gyroscope on a 10 cm coil: 1.62e-19 s, 3.14e-5 fringes; Sagnac's own ring, 1913: 4.84e-17 s, 0.0666 fringes against a reported 0.07; a laboratory turntable at one revolution a second: 6.99e-17 s, 0.0331 fringes; Michelson and Gale, 1925: 4.50e-16 s, 0.2364 fringes against a reported 0.23. Michelson and Gale's rectangle in Illinois is the one that carries the check: 0.236 fringes predicted from its own dimensions and the vertical component of the Earth's rotation at its latitude, and 0.230 reported.

The ring where the two beams disagree

Send light both ways round a closed loop on a turntable and the two beams come back at different times, by 4AΩ/c² — an expression with no refractive index in it, no shape of the loop and no position of the axis. The same number is what a set of clocks round the rim fails to close by, which is the sharper statement — on a rotating platform there is no global simultaneity to be had.

relativity · Simultaneity
Where to put the far clock's zero. Two clocks three light-seconds apart, synchronised by radar: a pulse leaves the near clock at 0, bounces off the far one, and returns at 6 seconds. The far clock must be set to some time between those, and every choice is drawn. Einstein's convention puts it at 3 — halfway — and gives the same speed of light in both directions. Any other value is equally consistent with every measurement that can be made, because everything measurable involves a round trip and the round trip takes 6 seconds under every one of them: computed here across the five conventions, the round-trip times differ by 0e+0 seconds. The lines are the resulting surfaces of simultaneity, which fan out from the halfway choice. What each choice fixes is the one-way speed of light — ε = 0.25 makes it 2.00c outward and 0.67c back, ε = 0.4 makes it 1.25c outward and 0.83c back, ε = 0.5 makes it 1.00c outward and 1.00c back, ε = 0.6 makes it 0.83c outward and 1.25c back, ε = 0.75 makes it 0.67c outward and 2.00c back — and no experiment distinguishes them, because measuring a one-way speed requires two synchronised clocks and synchronising them requires the answer.

The speed that cannot be measured one way

Every measurement of the speed of light ever made has sent it out and brought it back. Measuring it one way needs two clocks that agree, and making two distant clocks agree needs a rule about when the far one should read what — which is a choice, not a discovery. The constancy of c is a fact about round trips; its isotropy is a convention, chosen because it makes the equations simple.

relativity · Simultaneity
The rotation that mixes electricity into magnetism. The two Lorentz invariants of a field — E² − c²B² across and 2E·cB up — as the field is rotated by the duality transformation that takes E into cB and cB into −E. Every configuration moves on a circle, so the combination of the two invariants is preserved while neither is. A light wave sits at the origin and stays there, which is why a wave cannot be turned into anything else by this rotation; a static charge starts on the positive axis and is carried round to a pure magnetic field a quarter turn later. The source-free equations are unchanged by the whole family, so a universe with no charges in it has no way to say which field is which.

The symmetry one missing charge would complete

Maxwell's equations with no sources are unchanged by rotating the electric field into the magnetic one. With sources they are not, and the only thing missing is magnetic charge — which, if one existed anywhere, would force every electric charge in the universe to be a multiple of a fixed unit.

electromagnetism · Maxwell equations
Charge density and current, mixing like time and space. The charge density and the current density of a wire, against the rapidity of the frame they are measured in, starting from cρ = 0 and J = 2. They mix by exactly the transformation that mixes a time and a space coordinate — a hyperbolic rotation — and the combination c²ρ² − J² is unchanged at every rapidity, checked here to nine decimal places. A wire that is neutral in the laboratory is charged in every other frame, at exactly one rapidity out of all of them, and that single fact is the mechanism the first rung of this ladder tells as a story about two contracted lattices. Here it is a coordinate change.

Charge and current are one thing

The rung below asks what a boost leaves alone and answers charge. That answer forces the next one: a fixed charge in a contracting volume gives a density that transforms like a time component, and a current that transforms like a space one. So charge density and current density are the four parts of one object — and conservation of charge stops being an extra law and becomes the condition that makes the object exist.

relativity · Field transformation
Six numbers, one object. The electromagnetic field tensor written out as the four-by-four array it is, for a field with E = (0.4, 1.2, 0) and cB = (0, 0, 0.7), and again after a boost of rapidity 0.9 along the first axis. The array is antisymmetric — checked entry by entry — so of its sixteen slots only six are independent, and those six are the three components of E and the three of cB. The boost does not act on E and B separately; it acts on the array, mixing the top row into the lower block, which is what 'the electric field in one frame is partly magnetic in another' means written down. Its two scalars, E·B = 0.000 and E² − c²B² = 1.110, are unchanged, and they are the only two an antisymmetric rank-two tensor has.

Six numbers, one object

Three components of E and three of B mix into each other under a boost and never into anything else. Six numbers that transform among themselves are the independent entries of a four-by-four antisymmetric array, and writing them that way is not notation — it turns Maxwell's four equations into two, makes the two invariants the only two there could be, and shows that "electric" is a choice of axes rather than a kind of field.

relativity · Field transformation
A blackbody in every direction, at a different temperature in each. The spectrum of a blackbody at 100 kelvin in its own frame, seen by an observer it is moving past at 0.5 of the speed of light, in 5 directions. Each curve is a Planck spectrum exactly — the Planck form survives a Doppler shift, with the temperature multiplied by the shift — and the temperatures run from 57.74 kelvin looking one way to 173.21 looking the other. So the body is a perfect blackbody in each direction and has no single temperature. A thermometer placed in the radiation reads something between, and what it reads depends on where it is put and on how much of the sky it sees — which is the reason a transformation law for temperature was argued about for sixty years without being found.

The body that has no temperature when it moves

Energy, momentum, length, duration and field strength all change when the observer moves. Temperature was argued about for sixty years, with three transformation laws proposed and each defended by people making no mistake. The resolution is that a moving blackbody is a perfect blackbody in every direction at a different temperature in each — so a thermometer's reading depends on where it is put, and the quantity the law was for is not there.

relativity · Relativistic thermodynamics
What a boost leaves alone, and what it does not. How each quantity of a box of blackbody radiation changes when the observer moves at 0.8 of the speed of light, a Lorentz factor of 1.667, on a logarithmic axis with one at the centre. The top four do not change at all, and the reason is the same in each case: they are counts, or logarithms of counts, or invariants built from four-vectors. A number of photons is a number, and every observer arrives at the same number. The rest change, by powers of the Lorentz factor that follow from the first four. And the entry that matters is the last two together: the energy density rises as the square of the factor while the entropy density rises as the factor itself, so the ratio between them that would define a temperature does not stay fixed — which is why the boosted radiation cannot be a blackbody at any temperature at all.

The count that no observer can disagree about

A moving body, it turns out, has no temperature. What it does have is an entropy, and every observer agrees about it — because entropy is the logarithm of a count of arrangements, and a count is a number. That one invariant, with energy and momentum being parts of one object, is enough to compute everything a temperature could not: what happens to the energy density, the entropy density, and the relation between them that having a temperature consists of.

relativity · Relativistic thermodynamics

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Reference frameField transformationThe Lorentz transformationRapiditySimultaneityFour-vectorMaxwell equationsRelativityCharge invarianceEquilibriumLength contractionLight cone

All concepts