In physics, the principle of relativity is the requirement that the equations describing the laws of physics have the same form in all admissible frames of reference.
For example, in the framework of special relativity the Maxwell equations have the same form in all inertial frames of reference. In the framework of general relativity the Maxwell equations or the Einstein field equations have the same form in arbitrary frames of reference.
Certain principles of relativity have been widely assumed in most
scientific disciplines. One of the most widespread is the belief that
any law of nature
should be the same at all times; and scientific investigations
generally assume that laws of nature are the same regardless of the
person measuring them. These sorts of principles have been incorporated
into scientific inquiry at the most fundamental of levels.
Any principle of relativity prescribes a symmetry
in natural law: that is, the laws must look the same to one observer as
they do to another. According to a theoretical result called Noether's theorem, any such symmetry will also imply a conservation law alongside. For example, if two observers at different times see the same laws, then a quantity called energy will be conserved.
In this light, relativity principles make testable predictions about
how nature behaves, and are not just statements about how scientists
should write laws.
Special principle of relativity
According to the first postulate of the special theory of relativity:
Special principle of relativity: If a system of coordinates K is chosen so that, in relation to it, physical laws hold good in their simplest form, the same laws hold good in relation to any other system of coordinates K' moving in uniform translation relatively to K.
— Albert Einstein: The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity, Part A, §1
This postulate defines an inertial frame of reference.
The special principle of relativity states that physical laws should be the same in every inertial frame of reference, but that they may vary across non-inertial ones. This principle is used in both Newtonian mechanics and the theory of special relativity. Its influence in the latter is so strong that Max Planck named the theory after the principle.
The principle requires physical laws to be the same for any body
moving at constant velocity as they are for a body at rest. A
consequence is that an observer in an inertial reference frame cannot
determine an absolute speed or direction of travel in space, and may
only speak of speed or direction relative to some other object.
The principle does not extend to non-inertial reference frames because those frames do not, in general experience, seem to abide by the same laws of physics. In classical physics, fictitious forces are used to describe acceleration in non-inertial reference frames.
In Newtonian mechanics
The special principle of relativity was first explicitly enunciated by Galileo Galilei in 1632 in his Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, using the metaphor of Galileo's ship.
Newtonian mechanics added to the special principle several other
concepts, including laws of motion, gravitation, and an assertion of an absolute time. When formulated in the context of these laws, the special principle of relativity states that the laws of mechanics are invariant under a Galilean transformation.
The principle of relativity,
according to which the laws of physical phenomena should be the same,
whether for an observer fixed, or for an observer carried along in a
uniform movement of translation; so that we have not and could not have
any means of discerning whether or not we are carried along in such a
motion.
— Henri Poincaré, 1904
In their 1905 papers on electrodynamics, Henri Poincaré and Albert Einstein explained that with the Lorentz transformations the relativity principle holds perfectly. Einstein elevated the (special) principle of relativity to a postulate
of the theory and derived the Lorentz transformations from this
principle combined with the principle of the independence of the speed
of light (in vacuum) from the motion of the source. These two principles
were reconciled with each other (in Einstein's treatment, though not in
Poincaré's) by a re-examination of the fundamental meanings of space
and time intervals.
The strength of special relativity lies in its derivation from simple, basic principles, including the invariance of the laws of physics under a shift of inertial reference frames and the invariance of the speed of light in a vacuum. (See also: Lorentz covariance.)
It is, in fact, possible to derive the Lorentz transformations from the principle of relativity alone and obtain the constancy of the speed of light as a consequence.
Using only the isotropy of space and the symmetry implied by the
principle of special relativity, one can show that the space-time
transformations between inertial frames are either Galilean or
Lorentzian. In the Lorentzian case, one can then obtain relativistic
interval conservation and the constancy of the speed of light.
General principle of relativity
The general principle of relativity states:
All systems of reference are equivalent with respect to the formulation of the fundamental laws of physics.
— C. Møller The Theory of Relativity, p. 220
That is, physical laws are the same in all reference frames—inertial or non-inertial. An accelerated charged particle might emit synchrotron radiation,
though a particle at rest doesn't. If we consider now the same
accelerated charged particle in its non-inertial rest frame, it emits
radiation at rest.
Physics in non-inertial reference frames was historically treated by a coordinate transformation,
first, to an inertial reference frame, performing the necessary
calculations therein, and using another to return to the non-inertial
reference frame. In most such situations, the same laws of physics can
be used if certain predictable fictitious forces are added into consideration; an example is a uniformly rotating reference frame, which can be treated as an inertial reference frame if one adds a fictitious centrifugal force and Coriolis force into consideration.
The problems involved are not always so trivial. Special
relativity predicts that an observer in an inertial reference frame
doesn't see objects he would describe as moving faster than the speed of
light. However, in the non-inertial reference frame of Earth,
treating a spot on the Earth as a fixed point, the stars are observed
to move in the sky, circling once about the Earth per day. Since the
stars are light years away, this observation means that, in the
non-inertial reference frame of the Earth, anybody who looks at the
stars is seeing objects which appear, to them, to be moving faster than
the speed of light.
Since non-inertial reference frames do not abide by the special principle of relativity, such situations are not self-contradictory.
General relativity
General relativity was developed by Einstein in the years 1907 - 1915. General relativity postulates that the globalLorentz covariance of special relativity becomes a local Lorentz covariance in the presence of matter. The presence of matter "curves" spacetime, and this curvature affects the path of free particles (and even the path of light). General relativity uses the mathematics of differential geometry and tensors in order to describe gravitation as an effect of the geometry of spacetime. Einstein based this new theory on the general principle of relativity,
and he named the theory after the underlying principle.
In physics, a frame of reference (or reference frame) consists of an abstract coordinate system
and the set of physical reference points that uniquely fix (locate and
orient) the coordinate system and standardize measurements.
In n dimensions, n+1 reference points are sufficient to fully
define a reference frame. Using rectangular (Cartesian) coordinates, a
reference frame may be defined with a reference point at the origin and a
reference point at one unit distance along each of the n coordinate
axes.
In Einsteinian relativity, reference frames are used to specify the relationship between a moving observer and the phenomenon or phenomena under observation. In this context, the phrase often becomes "observational frame of reference" (or "observational reference frame"), which implies that the observer is at rest in the frame, although not necessarily located at its origin. A relativistic reference frame includes (or implies) the coordinate time, which does not correspond across different frames moving relatively to each other. The situation thus differs from Galilean relativity, where all possible coordinate times are essentially equivalent.
Different aspects of "frame of reference"
The
need to distinguish between the various meanings of "frame of
reference" has led to a variety of terms. For example, sometimes the
type of coordinate system is attached as a modifier, as in Cartesian frame of reference. Sometimes the state of motion is emphasized, as in rotating frame of reference. Sometimes the way it transforms to frames considered as related is emphasized as in Galilean frame of reference. Sometimes frames are distinguished by the scale of their observations, as in macroscopic and microscopic frames of reference.
In this article, the term observational frame of reference is used when emphasis is upon the state of motion
rather than upon the coordinate choice or the character of the
observations or observational apparatus. In this sense, an observational
frame of reference allows study of the effect of motion upon an entire
family of coordinate systems that could be attached to this frame. On
the other hand, a coordinate system may be employed for many
purposes where the state of motion is not the primary concern. For
example, a coordinate system may be adopted to take advantage of the
symmetry of a system. In a still broader perspective, the formulation of
many problems in physics employs generalized coordinates, normal modes or eigenvectors,
which are only indirectly related to space and time. It seems useful to
divorce the various aspects of a reference frame for the discussion
below. We therefore take observational frames of reference, coordinate
systems, and observational equipment as independent concepts, separated
as below:
A coordinate system is a mathematical concept, amounting to a choice of language used to describe observations.
Consequently, an observer in an observational frame of reference can
choose to employ any coordinate system (Cartesian, polar, curvilinear,
generalized, …) to describe observations made from that frame of
reference. A change in the choice of this coordinate system does not
change an observer's state of motion, and so does not entail a change in
the observer's observational frame of reference. This viewpoint can be found elsewhere as well.[3] Which is not to dispute that some coordinate systems may be a better choice for some observations than are others.
Choice of what to measure and with what observational apparatus
is a matter separate from the observer's state of motion and choice of
coordinate system.
Here is a quotation applicable to moving observational frames and various associated Euclidean three-space coordinate systems [R, R′, etc.]:
“
We first introduce the notion of reference frame, itself related to the idea of observer:
the reference frame is, in some sense, the "Euclidean space carried by
the observer". Let us give a more mathematical definition:… the
reference frame is... the set of all points in the Euclidean space with
the rigid body motion of the observer. The frame, denoted , is said to move with the observer.… The spatial positions of particles are labelled relative to a frame by establishing a coordinate systemR with origin O. The corresponding set of axes, sharing the rigid body motion of the frame , can be considered to give a physical realization of . In a frame , coordinates are changed from R to R′ by carrying out, at each instant of time, the same coordinate transformation on the components of intrinsic objects (vectors and tensors) introduced to represent physical quantities in this frame.
”
and this on the utility of separating the notions of and [R, R′, etc.]:
“
As
noted by Brillouin, a distinction between mathematical sets of
coordinates and physical frames of reference must be made. The ignorance
of such distinction is the source of much confusion… the dependent
functions such as velocity for example, are measured with respect to a
physical reference frame, but one is free to choose any mathematical
coordinate system in which the equations are specified.
”
and this, also on the distinction between and [R, R′, etc.]:
“
The
idea of a reference frame is really quite different from that of a
coordinate system. Frames differ just when they define different spaces (sets of rest
points) or times (sets of simultaneous events). So the ideas of a
space, a time, of rest and simultaneity, go inextricably together with
that of frame. However, a mere shift of origin, or a purely spatial
rotation of space coordinates results in a new coordinate system. So
frames correspond at best to classes of coordinate systems.
”
and from J. D. Norton:
“
In
traditional developments of special and general relativity it has been
customary not to distinguish between two quite distinct ideas. The first
is the notion of a coordinate system, understood simply as the smooth,
invertible assignment of four numbers to events in spacetime
neighborhoods. The second, the frame of reference, refers to an
idealized system used to assign such numbers … To avoid unnecessary
restrictions, we can divorce this arrangement from metrical notions. …
Of special importance for our purposes is that each frame of reference
has a definite state of motion at each event of spacetime.…Within the
context of special relativity and as long as we restrict ourselves to
frames of reference in inertial motion, then little of importance
depends on the difference between an inertial frame of reference and the
inertial coordinate system it induces. This comfortable circumstance
ceases immediately once we begin to consider frames of reference in
nonuniform motion even within special relativity.…More recently, to
negotiate the obvious ambiguities of Einstein’s treatment, the notion of
frame of reference has reappeared as a structure distinct from a
coordinate system.
An observer O, situated at the origin of a local set of coordinates – a frame of reference F. The observer in this frame uses the coordinates (x, y, z, t) to describe a spacetime event, shown as a star.
Although the term "coordinate system" is often used (particularly by
physicists) in a nontechnical sense, the term "coordinate system" does
have a precise meaning in mathematics, and sometimes that is what the
physicist means as well.
A coordinate system in mathematics is a facet of geometry or of algebra, in particular, a property of manifolds (for example, in physics, configuration spaces or phase spaces). The coordinates of a point r in an n-dimensional space are simply an ordered set of n numbers:
In a general Banach space, these numbers could be (for example) coefficients in a functional expansion like a Fourier series. In a physical problem, they could be spacetime coordinates or normal mode amplitudes. In a robot design, they could be angles of relative rotations, linear displacements, or deformations of joints. Here we will suppose these coordinates can be related to a Cartesian coordinate system by a set of functions:
where x, y, z, etc. are the n Cartesian coordinates of the point. Given these functions, coordinate surfaces are defined by the relations:
The intersection of these surfaces define coordinate lines. At any selected point, tangents to the intersecting coordinate lines at that point define a set of basis vectors {e1, e2, …, en} at that point. That is:[22]
which can be normalized to be of unit length. For more detail see curvilinear coordinates.
Coordinate surfaces, coordinate lines, and basis vectors are components of a coordinate system. If the basis vectors are orthogonal at every point, the coordinate system is an orthogonal coordinate system.
An important aspect of a coordinate system is its metric tensorgik, which determines the arc lengthds in the coordinate system in terms of its coordinates:
General and specific topics of coordinate systems can be pursued following the See also links below.
Observational frames of reference
Three
frames of reference in special relativity. The black frame is at rest.
The primed frame moves at 40% of light speed, and the double primed
frame at 80%. Note the scissors-like change as speed increases.
An observational frame of reference, often referred to as a physical frame of reference, a frame of reference, or simply a frame, is a physical concept related to an observer
and the observer's state of motion. Here we adopt the view expressed by
Kumar and Barve: an observational frame of reference is characterized only by its state of motion. However, there is lack of unanimity on this point. In special relativity, the distinction is sometimes made between an observer and a frame. According to this view, a frame is an observer
plus a coordinate lattice constructed to be an orthonormal right-handed
set of spacelike vectors perpendicular to a timelike vector. See Doran. This restricted view is not used here, and is not universally adopted even in discussions of relativity. In general relativity the use of general coordinate systems is common (see, for example, the Schwarzschild solution for the gravitational field outside an isolated sphere).
There are two types of observational reference frame: inertial and non-inertial. An inertial frame of reference is defined as one in which all laws of physics take on their simplest form. In special relativity these frames are related by Lorentz transformations, which are parametrized by rapidity. In Newtonian mechanics, a more restricted definition requires only that Newton's first law holds true; that is, a Newtonian inertial frame is one in which a free particle travels in a straight line at constant speed, or is at rest. These frames are related by Galilean transformations. These relativistic and Newtonian transformations are expressed in spaces of general dimension in terms of representations of the Poincaré group and of the Galilean group.
In contrast to the inertial frame, a non-inertial frame of reference is one in which fictitious forces
must be invoked to explain observations. An example is an observational
frame of reference centered at a point on the Earth's surface. This
frame of reference orbits around the center of the Earth, which
introduces the fictitious forces known as the Coriolis force, centrifugal force, and gravitational force. (All of these forces including gravity disappear in a truly inertial reference frame, which is one of free-fall.)
Measurement apparatus
A further aspect of a frame of reference is the role of the measurement apparatus
(for example, clocks and rods) attached to the frame (see Norton quote
above). This question is not addressed in this article, and is of
particular interest in quantum mechanics, where the relation between observer and measurement is still under discussion (see measurement problem).
In physics experiments, the frame of reference in which the
laboratory measurement devices are at rest is usually referred to as the
laboratory frame
or simply "lab frame." An example would be the frame in which the
detectors for a particle accelerator are at rest. The lab frame in some
experiments is an inertial frame, but it is not required to be (for
example the laboratory on the surface of the Earth in many physics
experiments is not inertial). In particle physics experiments, it is
often useful to transform energies and momenta of particles from the lab
frame where they are measured, to the center of momentum frame
"COM frame" in which calculations are sometimes simplified, since
potentially all kinetic energy still present in the COM frame may be
used for making new particles.
In this connection it may be noted that the clocks and rods often
used to describe observers' measurement equipment in thought, in
practice are replaced by a much more complicated and indirect metrology that is connected to the nature of the vacuum, and uses atomic clocks that operate according to the standard model and that must be corrected for gravitational time dilation.
In fact, Einstein felt that clocks and rods were merely expedient
measuring devices and they should be replaced by more fundamental
entities based upon, for example, atoms and molecules.
Figure 1: Two cars moving at different but constant velocities observed from stationary inertial frame S attached to the road and moving inertial frame S′ attached to the first car.
Consider a situation common in everyday life. Two cars travel along a
road, both moving at constant velocities. See Figure 1. At some
particular moment, they are separated by 200 metres. The car in front is
travelling at 22 metres per second and the car behind is travelling at
30 metres per second. If we want to find out how long it will take the
second car to catch up with the first, there are three obvious "frames
of reference" that we could choose.
First, we could observe the two cars from the side of the road. We define our "frame of reference" S
as follows. We stand on the side of the road and start a stop-clock at
the exact moment that the second car passes us, which happens to be when
they are a distance d = 200 m apart. Since neither of the cars is accelerating, we can determine their positions by the following formulas, where is the position in meters of car one after time t in seconds and is the position of car two after time t.
Notice that these formulas predict at t = 0 s the first car is
200 m down the road and the second car is right beside us, as expected.
We want to find the time at which . Therefore, we set and solve for , that is:
Alternatively, we could choose a frame of reference S′
situated in the first car. In this case, the first car is stationary and
the second car is approaching from behind at a speed of v2 − v1 = 8 m / s. In order to catch up to the first car, it will take a time of d/v2 − v1 = 200/8 s,
that is, 25 seconds, as before. Note how much easier the problem
becomes by choosing a suitable frame of reference. The third possible
frame of reference would be attached to the second car. That example
resembles the case just discussed, except the second car is stationary
and the first car moves backward towards it at 8 m / s.
It would have been possible to choose a rotating, accelerating
frame of reference, moving in a complicated manner, but this would have
served to complicate the problem unnecessarily. It is also necessary to
note that one is able to convert measurements made in one coordinate
system to another. For example, suppose that your watch is running five
minutes fast compared to the local standard time. If you know that this
is the case, when somebody asks you what time it is, you are able to
deduct five minutes from the time displayed on your watch in order to
obtain the correct time. The measurements that an observer makes about a
system depend therefore on the observer's frame of reference (you might
say that the bus arrived at 5 past three, when in fact it arrived at
three).
Additional example
Figure 2: Simple-minded frame-of-reference example
For a simple example involving only the orientation of two observers,
consider two people standing, facing each other on either side of a
north-south street. See Figure 2. A car drives past them heading south.
For the person facing east, the car was moving towards the right.
However, for the person facing west, the car was moving toward the left.
This discrepancy is because the two people used two different frames
of reference from which to investigate this system.
For a more complex example involving observers in relative
motion, consider Alfred, who is standing on the side of a road watching a
car drive past him from left to right. In his frame of reference,
Alfred defines the spot where he is standing as the origin, the road as
the x-axis and the direction in front of him as the positive y-axis. To
him, the car moves along the x axis with some velocityv in the positive x-direction. Alfred's frame of reference is considered an inertial frame of reference because he is not accelerating (ignoring effects such as Earth's rotation and gravity).
Now consider Betsy, the person driving the car. Betsy, in
choosing her frame of reference, defines her location as the origin, the
direction to her right as the positive x-axis, and the direction in front of her as the positive y-axis.
In this frame of reference, it is Betsy who is stationary and the
world around her that is moving – for instance, as she drives past
Alfred, she observes him moving with velocity v in the negative y-direction. If she is driving north, then north is the positive y-direction; if she turns east, east becomes the positive y-direction.
Finally, as an example of non-inertial observers, assume Candace
is accelerating her car. As she passes by him, Alfred measures her acceleration and finds it to be a
in the negative x-direction. Assuming Candace's acceleration is
constant, what acceleration does Betsy measure? If Betsy's velocity v
is constant, she is in an inertial frame of reference, and she will
find the acceleration to be the same as Alfred in her frame of
reference, a in the negative y-direction. However, if she is accelerating at rate A in the negative y-direction (in other words, slowing down), she will find Candace's acceleration to be a′ = a − A in the negative y-direction - a smaller value than Alfred has measured. Similarly, if she is accelerating at rate A in the positive y-direction (speeding up), she will observe Candace's acceleration as a′ = a + A in the negative y-direction – a larger value than Alfred's measurement.
Frames of reference are especially important in special relativity,
because when a frame of reference is moving at some significant
fraction of the speed of light, then the flow of time in that frame does
not necessarily apply in another frame. The speed of light is
considered to be the only true constant between moving frames of
reference.
Remarks
It is important to note some assumptions made above about the various
inertial frames of reference. Newton, for instance, employed universal
time, as explained by the following example. Suppose that you own two
clocks, which both tick at exactly the same rate. You synchronize them
so that they both display exactly the same time. The two clocks are now
separated and one clock is on a fast moving train, traveling at constant
velocity towards the other. According to Newton, these two clocks will
still tick at the same rate and will both show the same time. Newton
says that the rate of time as measured in one frame of reference should
be the same as the rate of time in another. That is, there exists a
"universal" time and all other times in all other frames of reference
will run at the same rate as this universal time irrespective of their
position and velocity. This concept of time and simultaneity was later
generalized by Einstein in his special theory of relativity
(1905) where he developed transformations between inertial frames of
reference based upon the universal nature of physical laws and their
economy of expression (Lorentz transformations).
It is also important to note that the definition of inertial
reference frame can be extended beyond three-dimensional Euclidean
space. Newton's assumed a Euclidean space, but general relativity uses a more general geometry. As an example of why this is important, let us consider the geometry of an ellipsoid. In this geometry, a "free" particle is defined as one at rest or traveling at constant speed on a geodesic
path. Two free particles may begin at the same point on the surface,
traveling with the same constant speed in different directions. After a
length of time, the two particles collide at the opposite side of the
ellipsoid. Both "free" particles traveled with a constant speed,
satisfying the definition that no forces were acting. No acceleration
occurred and so Newton's first law held true. This means that the
particles were in inertial frames of reference. Since no forces were
acting, it was the geometry of the situation which caused the two
particles to meet each other again. In a similar way, it is now common
to describe[32] that we exist in a four-dimensional geometry known as spacetime.
In this picture, the curvature of this 4D space is responsible for the
way in which two bodies with mass are drawn together even if no forces
are acting. This curvature of spacetime replaces the force known as
gravity in Newtonian mechanics and special relativity.
Non-inertial frames
Here the relation between inertial and non-inertial observational
frames of reference is considered. The basic difference between these
frames is the need in non-inertial frames for fictitious forces, as
described below.
An accelerated frame of reference is often delineated as being
the "primed" frame, and all variables that are dependent on that frame
are notated with primes, e.g. x′, y′, a′.
The vector from the origin of an inertial reference frame to the
origin of an accelerated reference frame is commonly notated as R. Given a point of interest that exists in both frames, the vector from the inertial origin to the point is called r, and the vector from the accelerated origin to the point is called r′.
From the geometry of the situation, we get
Taking the first and second derivatives of this with respect to time, we obtain
where V and A are the velocity and acceleration of the accelerated system with respect to the inertial system and v and a are the velocity and acceleration of the point of interest with respect to the inertial frame.
These equations allow transformations between the two coordinate systems; for example, we can now write Newton's second law as
When there is accelerated motion due to a force being exerted there
is manifestation of inertia. If an electric car designed to recharge its
battery system when decelerating is switched to braking, the batteries
are recharged, illustrating the physical strength of manifestation of
inertia. However, the manifestation of inertia does not prevent
acceleration (or deceleration), for manifestation of inertia occurs in
response to change in velocity due to a force. Seen from the perspective
of a rotating frame of reference the manifestation of inertia appears
to exert a force (either in centrifugal direction, or in a direction orthogonal to an object's motion, the Coriolis effect).
A common sort of accelerated reference frame is a frame that is
both rotating and translating (an example is a frame of reference
attached to a CD which is playing while the player is carried). This
arrangement leads to the equation (see Fictitious force for a derivation):
or, to solve for the acceleration in the accelerated frame,