Illustrated Physics
physics, drawn
Concept

The Lorentz transformation — where it appears

The change of coordinates between frames in uniform relative motion, being whatever transformation leaves the spacetime interval unchanged. It is a hyperbolic rotation, so it mixes time into space the way an ordinary rotation mixes two spatial directions — and rapidity is the angle that simply adds.

Named by 29 essays across 2 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

A spacetime diagram at β = 0.5. Position across, time up, in units where light travels at 45°. The shaded wedges are the future and past reachable by light; the tilted axes belong to an observer moving at 0.5 of the speed of light.

Two axes, one speed, and a diagram that does the arguing

Put position across and time up, insist that light travels at forty-five degrees for everyone, and nearly every result in special relativity becomes something to read off rather than derive.

relativity · Spacetime diagram Simultaneity at β = 0.5. Two events on the same horizontal line happen at the same time for the stationary observer. The moving observer slices spacetime along the tilted line, and for them one event happens before the other.

Now is a choice of slicing

Two events happening at the same time is not a fact about the events. It is a fact about who is asking, and different observers slice spacetime at different angles.

relativity · Simultaneity Composing a boost with a speed, and never passing one. The speed one observer measures when a body moving at v is seen from a frame already moving at u, for u = 0.4, 0.6, 0.9, 1 times the speed of light. Every curve ends at one and none crosses it. The straight dashed line is the Galilean answer, u + v, which reaches 1.4c and is wrong. The flat line at the top is light: composing c with anything gives c back.

Speeds that refuse to add, and the quantity that does

Run at half the speed of light, throw something forward at half the speed of light, and the result is not the speed of light. It is four-fifths of it, and there is a variable in which the arithmetic is still simple addition.

relativity · Velocity-addition What puts a scale on a tilted axis. A spacetime diagram with a second observer's axes at β = 0.6. The curves are the sets of events at a fixed interval from the origin — c²t² − x² = s², one branch each for s = 0.5, s = 1, s = 1.5 — and the whole point of them is where they cross. A unit of the moving observer's time is wherever the s = 1 curve meets the tilted time axis, and on the page that point is 1.250 times as far from the origin as the stationary observer's own unit. Without the hyperbolae the tilted axes carry no scale at all, and every argument about which of two clocks is behind is unreadable off the diagram. Each drawn crossing reads back as its own interval to 0.0e+0.

The quantity nobody argues about

Relativity takes away the length of a rod and the duration of an event and hands back exactly one thing in their place. Its hyperbolae are what put a scale on the tilted axes of a spacetime diagram — without which the diagram is a picture with no units on it.

relativity · Spacetime diagram What puts a scale on a tilted axis. A spacetime diagram with a second observer's axes at β = 0.6. The curves are the sets of events at a fixed interval from the origin — c²t² − x² = s², one branch each for s = 0.5, s = 1, s = 1.5 — and the whole point of them is where they cross. A unit of the moving observer's time is wherever the s = 1 curve meets the tilted time axis, and on the page that point is 1.250 times as far from the origin as the stationary observer's own unit. Without the hyperbolae the tilted axes carry no scale at all, and every argument about which of two clocks is behind is unreadable off the diagram. Each drawn crossing reads back as its own interval to 0.0e+0.

The invariant that survives a boost

Energy and momentum are both answers to the question "how fast is it going, and according to whom". One combination of them is not, and that combination is the mass — which is why two photons of 511 keV can be a thing of mass 1.022 MeV or a thing of no mass at all, depending only on the angle between them.

relativity · Mass-energy Simultaneity at β = 0.866. Two events on the same horizontal line happen at the same time for the stationary observer. The moving observer slices spacetime along the tilted line, and for them one event happens before the other.

The pole that fits and does not fit

A twenty-metre pole is carried through a ten-metre barn at 0.866 of light speed, and both doors shut behind it. In the pole's own frame the barn is five metres long and there is plainly no room. Both accounts are correct, and the doors' closings are 57.8 nanoseconds apart in one of them.

relativity · Length contraction 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 The rotation two boosts leave behind. The angle through which a frame's axes are turned after two boosts of equal size, against the angle between the two boosts, for 4 speeds. Two boosts in the same direction compose to a boost and nothing else, which is the zero at the left; two in different directions do not. What is left over is a rotation, and it is not small at large speeds: at β = 0.3 it peaks at 2.7° when the boosts are 91° apart, at β = 0.6 it peaks at 12.8° when the boosts are 96° apart, at β = 0.85 it peaks at 36.1° when the boosts are 108° apart, at β = 0.95 it peaks at 63.2° when the boosts are 122° apart. Each curve here is computed by multiplying the two boost matrices and pulling the rotation out of the product, not by evaluating a formula; the closed form for perpendicular boosts is used to check the extraction and appears nowhere in the drawing. The consequence is that the Lorentz boosts do not form a group by themselves — compose two and you leave the set — and that an object carried round a closed path in velocity space comes back turned.

The turn that two pushes leave behind

Two boosts in different directions do not compose to a boost. The product carries a rotation, so a frame carried once round a closed path comes back turned — and the size of that turn was the factor of two standing between the calculated and the measured splitting of a spectral line.

relativity · Velocity-addition Two rockets that keep their distance, and the string that does not. Two rockets 0.5 unit apart in the laboratory, given identical acceleration programmes there, drawn in units where the light speed is one and c²/a is one. Their laboratory separation is constant for ever — the two worldlines are the same curve shifted sideways, and every horizontal line meets them 0.5 apart. The slanted lines are the rockets' own lines of simultaneity, and the distance between the worldlines measured along those is what a string tied between them has to span: at 0.3c it is 0.512, a stretch of 2 per cent; at 0.6c it is 0.557, a stretch of 11 per cent; at 0.8c it is 0.631, a stretch of 26 per cent; at 0.9c it is 0.710, a stretch of 42 per cent. The γL that is always quoted — 0.524, 0.625, 0.833, 1.147 here — is the limit of that measurement for a vanishing gap, and at a gap of 0.5 in these units it overstates the stretch by up to 38.1 per cent; shrinking the gap a hundredfold brings the two within 0.46 per cent. Either way the string is stretched and breaks, while the gap in the laboratory never changes by a millimetre. Length contraction is not something that happens to a rod. It is a statement about which events count as simultaneous, and a rod that is not allowed to contract is a rod that is being pulled apart.

The string that breaks between two rockets

Two rockets a metre apart, given identical acceleration programmes, stay a metre apart in the laboratory for ever. A string tied between them breaks anyway. Nothing pulls on it, nothing in the laboratory moves relative to anything else, and the string is stretched — because the distance it has to span is measured on the rockets' slices of simultaneity and not on the laboratory's.

relativity · Length contraction What a collision has to spend, against what it is given. The energy available in a proton–proton collision, against the energy of one beam, on logarithmic axes. Against a stationary target the available energy is √(2mE) and the line has slope one half; head-on it is 2E and the slope is one. Bevatron at 6.2 GeV per beam reaches 3.7 GeV; SPS fixed target at 450 GeV per beam reaches 29.1 GeV; LEP at 104.5 GeV per beam reaches 209.0 GeV; Tevatron at 980 GeV per beam reaches 1960.0 GeV; LHC at 6500 GeV per beam reaches 13000.0 GeV. The gap is the whole architecture of the subject: the LHC's beams give 13000 GeV head-on and would give 110 GeV against a stationary proton, a factor of 118. Reaching the same 13000 GeV in fixed-target mode would need a beam of 90.1 million GeV. What the missing energy has gone into is not lost: it is the kinetic energy of the centre of mass, which every product has to carry away and which no experiment can use.

The collision that wastes most of the energy

The LHC's two beams carry 6,500 GeV each and 13,000 GeV are available. Fire one of those beams at a stationary block of copper instead and 110 GeV are available — the other 12,890 have gone into the motion of the wreckage and cannot be used for anything. The difference is a square root, and every accelerator built since 1970 is a consequence of it.

relativity · Relativistic dynamics Where the second tick actually goes. A spacetime diagram with a second observer's axes at β = 0.6. The hyperbolae are the sets of events one second and one metre from the origin — invariantly, by the interval — and every observer's unit tick is where their own axis crosses them. That is checked here rather than drawn by eye. The moving observer's one-second mark sits 1.458 times further from the origin on the page than the stationary one's, so a ruler laid on this picture reads the two frames on different scales. The picture is not distorted; the page is Euclidean and spacetime is not. The Lorentz factor here is 1.2500.

The diagram a ruler cannot read

A spacetime diagram is drawn on flat paper, and the geometry it depicts is not flat. The tick marking one second on a moving observer's axis sits further from the origin than the stationary observer's, by an amount that is not the Lorentz factor and means nothing at all.

relativity · Spacetime diagram The point that does not notice the collision. Two bodies of rest mass 1 and 2, approaching at 0.8c and -0.3c, colliding elastically and leaving at -0.6168c and 0.5969c — speeds obtained by reversing the motion in the zero-momentum frame, with the total energy and momentum checked to a part in a million million. The third line is the energy-weighted centre. It runs straight through the collision at 0.1872c, which is the total momentum divided by the total energy, and it has no kink — verified at two hundred instants. Nothing here is the centre of mass: the rest masses are unchanged by the collision but the energies are redistributed, and it is the energies that do the weighting.

The centre that is not a place

The centre of mass is replaced in relativity by the centre of energy, which moves uniformly and does everything the old point did — except be the same point for everybody. Boost a spinning body and its centre moves, so a spinning object has no centre at all.

relativity · Relativistic dynamics Two things that change and one that does not. How a boost treats a piece of charged matter: the charge density rises by the Lorentz factor because the same charges occupy a contracted length, and the length falls by the same factor. At β = 0.6 the density is 1.250 times what it was and the length is 0.800 times, and their product is one to fourteen decimals across the whole range drawn. So the total charge is the same number in every frame, and it is the only quantity in the transformation that is. Charge density is the time component of a four-vector and transforms like an energy; charge itself is a scalar, and nothing about the observer changes it.

The one quantity a boost leaves alone

Energy, momentum, length, duration, density and field strength all change when the observer moves. Electric charge does not, and the whole of the field-transformation argument rests on it — so it is worth asking what the evidence is.

relativity · Field transformation Every speed there is, on one disc. The whole of velocity space drawn as a disc: the boundary is the speed of light and every possible velocity is a point inside. The rings are equal steps of rapidity — 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5 — and they sit at speeds 0.4621, 0.7616, 0.9051, 0.9640, 0.9866 of light. Equal steps of rapidity crowd towards the edge, checked ring by ring, which is the same fact as speeds refusing to add: a boost is a fixed step in rapidity and a shrinking step in speed. The drawing is the Poincaré model, in which angles are true and distances are not — so a shape near the rim is drawn small and is not small, and the boundary is infinitely far away in the geometry although it is a finite circle on the page.

The space that speeds live in

Speeds do not add, and the reason is that the set of all possible velocities is not a flat space. It is a hyperbolic plane of curvature minus one in rapidity — and the rotation two boosts leave behind is exactly the area of the triangle they make in it.

relativity · Velocity-addition The fringes a flow of water moves. The interference fringe shift against the speed of the water, for two tubes 1.5 m long, an index of 1.333, and light of 526 nm — Fizeau's apparatus. The beam is split, each half goes with the flow in one tube and against it in the other, and the two are recombined; the shift is the difference in transit time counted in wavelengths. Three predictions are drawn and they are not close together. If the water did not affect the light at all the shift would be zero, flat along the bottom. If the water carried the light with it completely the shift would be the steepest line. Fresnel's partial drag is the middle one, and at 7 m/s it gives 0.207 of a fringe — which is what was measured, to the accuracy of an eye reading a fringe pattern in 1851. The experiment therefore did not merely detect an effect; it chose between three quantitative possibilities that differ by factors of two, which is why a fraction of a fringe settled something.

The drag that was only an addition

Light in moving water is carried along by it, but only partly — by a fraction of the water's speed that depends on the refractive index in a way nobody could account for. Fresnel invented the coefficient to save a theory, Fizeau measured it in 1851, and it sat unexplained for half a century. It is the first term of the relativistic velocity addition and nothing else.

relativity · Velocity-addition The one number the boost leaves alone. The mass of a lambda into a proton and a pion, reconstructed from the two products' laboratory energies and momenta alone, against how fast the parent was moving — for five different rest-frame emission angles. Every curve is the same horizontal line. The lab energies vary by more than a factor of ten across this range and the angles between the products vary from almost 180° to a few degrees; the combination E² − p² of the pair does not vary at all, to 3.2e-15, which the figure requires before drawing anything. The light curves are the energies of the two products, on the same axis and to a different scale, drawn to show how much is moving while the invariant does not. This is the whole method of particle physics. A parent that lives for 10⁻²³ seconds is never detected; what is detected is two tracks, and their invariant mass is computed and histogrammed over millions of events. A parent that exists shows up as a peak at its own mass, at the same place whatever the beam energy, which is what makes the peak believable.

The cone a decay cannot leave

A particle at rest breaks into two and they go opposite ways. Set the parent moving and the whole pattern folds forward — into a cone with a hard edge, beyond which nothing is emitted at any rest-frame angle at all. The energy spectrum that comes out is exactly rectangular, and the one number the boost leaves alone is how the parent is identified at all.

relativity · Relativistic dynamics One boost, three constants, three pictures. The axes of a frame moving at 0.5 in units where the constant is one, drawn for the three signs the constant can have. The faint cross is the original frame's axes; the two heavy lines are the moving frame's, obtained by boosting them rather than by tilting them by hand. With a positive constant the two axes close in on one another symmetrically, and the line they are closing on is the invariant speed. With a zero constant only the time axis tilts and the space axis stays where it was, which is absolute simultaneity — every frame agrees which events are at the same time. With a negative constant the pair rotates rigidly, like a pair of axes turned in a plane. Nothing about light has been used to draw any of them. The three are the whole of what homogeneity, isotropy, the group property and the relativity principle permit, and choosing between them is a measurement rather than a postulate.

The transformation that never mentions light

Assume space and time are homogeneous, that space is isotropic, that two changes of frame compose into a third, and that the relativity principle holds. Those four leave exactly one free constant — and three possible worlds, one of them Galileo's and one of them Einstein's. Light appears nowhere in the derivation; it enters only when the constant has to be measured.

relativity · Spacetime diagram 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

Ask what a boost leaves alone and the answer is 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 map that keeps every cone and bends every worldline. Left: a grid of inertial worldlines, drawn solid, lines of simultaneity, faint, and light lines at 45°, dashed, in one space dimension. Right: the same grid after a map that stretches the light-cone coordinates u = t − x and v = t + x by two different increasing functions, u + 0.45·tanh(1.5u) and sinh(0.45v)/0.45. Light lines go to light lines, still at 45° to within a part in a billion, and the causal order of every one of 4000 sampled pairs of events is unchanged: whatever could influence what still can, and nothing new can. But the straight worldlines are bent — the one through x = 1 by 0.19 across the window — and the lines of simultaneity are no longer straight. In one space dimension the light cones cannot tell this picture from the inertial one.

What the light cones alone can decide

Keep nothing of spacetime but its light cones — which events could influence which — and ask how much geometry survives. With one dimension of space, almost none: any pair of increasing stretches of the two families of light lines preserves every cone and bends every straight worldline. With two or more, almost all of it: the only maps that keep every cone are Lorentz transformations, shifts and a uniform stretch, and nothing about straightness has to be assumed.

relativity · Spacetime diagram The rectangle a spin tilts. The laboratory energy of the pion from a tau into a pion and a neutrino moving at 0.8 of the speed of light, for samples of 60,000 decays whose parents have αP = +1, 0, −1 along their line of flight. Every sample fills the same interval, 313 to 2667 MeV: the edges are set by the masses and the speed, and they do not move. Inside that interval an unpolarised sample is flat and a polarised one is tilted, its height at each energy 1 + αP times the cosine of the rest-frame angle that energy corresponds to. Reading the slope back from each sample gives +0.993, −0.010, −1.006, each with a standard error near 0.006. A parent spinning along its flight throws the pion forwards in its own frame, and the boost turns forwards into more energetic, so the tilt of an energy spectrum measures a polarisation without any angle being measured at all.

The slope a spin leaves in a spectrum

An unpolarised parent decaying in flight gives its products a rectangle of energies. Give the parent a spin along its line of flight and the rectangle tilts, while its two edges stay exactly where they were. The tilt is the polarisation, it can be read without ever seeing which way the parent was going — and which variable it is read from decides how many decays the reading costs.

relativity · Relativistic dynamics A charge going past, as the field it delivers. The electric field across the line of motion at a point a distance b from the path of a passing charge, against time in units of b/c, on a logarithmic field axis in units of q/4πε₀b², for Lorentz factors of 1.2, 3, 10, 30. The peak is γ times the Coulomb field at rest and the width at half height is 2.311 b/c at γ = 1.2, 0.542 b/c at γ = 3, 0.154 b/c at γ = 10, 0.0511 b/c at γ = 30: taller by γ and shorter by γ, so the area under each curve — the sideways impulse the passing charge delivers, 2q²/4πε₀bv — is the same for all of them to within the integration's precision. A fast charge's field arrives as a thin, intense flash.

The charge that passes as a flash of light

A charge at rest has a field that no change of frame can turn into light. A charge going past at nearly the speed of light delivers a field that is, for every practical purpose, a pulse of light anyway: thin, perpendicular to the motion, with its electric and magnetic parts equal and crossed. Enrico Fermi saw in 1924 that such a field could be counted as photons, and the Large Hadron Collider now collides lead nuclei's photons with each other.

relativity · Field transformation Two pushes that nearly cancel. The forces between two equal charges moving side by side at the same speed, measured in the laboratory, in units of the Coulomb force the same two charges exert at rest, against their speed. Electric repulsion grows as γ, because a moving charge's field is stronger across its motion: 2.29 at β = 0.9, 7.1 at 0.99. The magnetic attraction of two parallel currents grows as γβ² and eats it almost entirely: the net push is γ(1 − β²) = 1/γ — 0.436 at 0.9 and 0.141 at 0.99. Measured in the pair's own frame the push is exactly the Coulomb force at every speed; the difference is not a force that exists in one frame and not another but a difference in how fast the two frames' clocks run while the charges drift apart.

The beam that stops pushing itself apart

A beam of electrons is a crowd of like charges, and a crowd of like charges flies apart. A slow beam does, within centimetres. A fast one hardly does at all: at a gigaelectronvolt the same current travels kilometres before its width doubles. The electric repulsion has not weakened — it has grown, by the factor γ. What has grown faster is a magnetic attraction between parallel currents, which cancels all but 1/γ² of the push. Seen from the beam itself there is no magnetism at all, only Coulomb repulsion acting while the beam's clocks run slow.

relativity · Field transformation A muon's spin lapping its own momentum round a storage ring. Snapshots of a muon circling a storage ring at γ = 29.3, taken every four turns (not to scale in time: the muon is drawn at a different place on the ring for each snapshot so they do not overlap). The dashed arrow is the direction of motion, tangent to the ring; the solid arrow is the spin. On each turn the spin gains 12.3° on the momentum — 2πaγ — so after 29.3 turns it has gained a full lap. That lap takes 4.37 microseconds, and the muon, whose lifetime is stretched from 2.2 to 64.4 microseconds by its speed, lives for about fifteen of them.

The spin that runs ahead of its own motion

A charged particle circling in a magnetic field has two directions that turn: the direction it is moving, and the direction its spin points. If the particle's magnetism were exactly what Dirac's equation first gave — a g-factor of exactly two — the two would turn together at every speed, the spin locked to the motion as a compass needle is locked to a car. The muon's g is not quite two, and its spin creeps ahead by a fixed rate that is the same at a crawl and at 99.94 per cent of the speed of light. That constancy is a delicate cancellation between a magnetic field made stronger by motion and a rotation that exists only because the particle is being turned, and it is what made the most precise measurements of the muon possible — at one magic speed, where the electric fields that steer the particles stop affecting the spin at all.

relativity · Field transformation In the rod's frame: a long rod threads through, front first. The same events seen from the rod's own frame, computed by transforming each point's motion from the hole's frame. Here the rod is its full length and the hole is the contracted one, 0.60 of it, sweeping left at 0.8c — a long rod over a short hole. But the moment each point starts to fall is not one moment in this frame: the front end starts at t′ = −1.07, the rear end at −0.27, and each point then falls at γu = 0.50c. While the start of the fall runs back along it the rod is bent, level behind and sloping in front; once every point is falling it is straight again and tilted, front down, by 21.8°. It threads through the hole front first as the hole slides under it, each part dropping below the plate just before the plate's far edge reaches it. It passes through in both frames; only the order of events along it differs.

The rod that is level for only one observer

A metre rod slides at high speed over a metre-wide hole in a thin plate. In the plate's frame the rod is contracted and drops through. In the rod's frame the hole is contracted, the rod is far too long for it, and it drops through anyway — because the instruction 'every point starts to fall now' names a different now for the rod. Its front end starts first, the start runs back along it, and the rod tips into the hole like a spear. Whether a moving thing is level is a question about which events are simultaneous, and so it has an answer only for an observer.

relativity · Simultaneity Loops that swell as the electric field approaches cB. A charge starting from rest in crossed uniform fields — the electric field up the page, the magnetic field out of it — for E/cB = 0.3, 0.6, 0.85, integrated exactly; lengths in units of mc/qB. Each traces a chain of loops drifting to the right at E/B. Newton's law gives loops of height 2mE/qB² — 0.6, 1.2, 1.7 — whatever the speed. The exact loops are 0.66, 1.88, 6.13 high, larger by γ² of the drift speed, 1.10, 1.56, 3.60: in the frame moving at the drift the electric field vanishes and the magnetic field is weakened to B/γ, and the charge circles at the drift speed on a larger orbit than a weaker field would explain alone. As E approaches cB the drift approaches c and the loop grows without limit.

The orbit that opens when E reaches cB

A charge in crossed electric and magnetic fields drifts sideways at E/B, looping as it goes, and the textbook leaves it there. The textbook result has a speed in it that can be made larger than light, and something has to give. What gives is the loop. As the electric field approaches c times the magnetic one, the loops swell without limit, and at E = cB the charge stops looping and is carried off for ever. Above that ratio no frame can make the electric field vanish; one can make the magnetic field vanish instead, and in that frame the charge simply runs away. The transition from a bound orbit to a run-away is decided by a single quantity every observer agrees on, E² − c²B².

relativity · Field transformation Where the two theories part: the magnetic permeability. The voltage across the spinning wall as a fraction of a metal's, against the material's relative permeability μ, for a permittivity ε = 6. Lorentz's electron theory (flat) polarises the material only through the force on its charges, so μ does not enter: (ε − 1)/ε = 0.833 at every μ. Relativity gives (εμ − 1)/εμ, which agrees exactly at μ = 1 — so no ordinary insulator, such as the ebonite H. A. Wilson spun in 1904, can tell them apart — and climbs towards a metal's value as μ grows. At μ = 3 (dot) the relativistic voltage is 13.3 per cent larger. That is why Wilson and Wilson needed an insulator that was also magnetic, and made one from steel spheres set in wax.

The voltage a moving magnet adds to an insulator

Spin a hollow cylinder of insulator in a magnetic field along its axis and a voltage appears between its inner and outer surfaces, because every piece of it is moving through the field. How large that voltage is turns out to depend on whether the insulator is magnetic, and the dependence was predicted by one theory and missed by the other. Maxwell's equations hold in a moving material only if the material's response is written in its own frame and carried into the laboratory by relativity — and then a moving magnet is also an electric dipole.

electromagnetism · Maxwell equations The readings of the moving clocks along one instant: a wave. The cosine of each moving clock's phase, read along a single laboratory instant, against position in light-periods of the clock, for clocks moving at 0.3c, 0.6c, 0.85c. The readings make a wave whose wavelength, measured from the drawing, is 3.18, 1.33, 0.62 light-periods: c²/(γvν₀), shrinking as the clocks move faster. For a clock that ticks at its rest energy over Planck's constant, ν₀ = mc²/h, that is h/γmv — de Broglie's wavelength, h over the momentum. Nothing about waves was assumed: only clocks, synchronised where they rest, read from a frame in which they move.

The wave a row of moving clocks leaves on an instant

Line up identical clocks, synchronise them where they stand, and send the whole row past a laboratory at a steady speed. On any one laboratory instant the clocks do not agree: the ones further ahead read less, by an amount that grows steadily along the row. The readings form a wave laid out in space, its crests are the moving row's instants, and they sweep along faster than light. Give each clock the frequency of its rest energy and the wavelength is exactly h/p. De Broglie's matter wave began, in 1923, as an argument about the relativity of simultaneity.

relativity · Simultaneity

Named alongside it

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

Reference framesCausalityThe Lorentz factorSimultaneityLength contractionLight coneSpacetime diagramRapidityVelocity-additionInvariant intervalMeasurementCentre of mass

All concepts