SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2504.04617

Limiting velocity and generalized Lorentz trasformations

Abstract

After a short Historical bibliographical note, in the Starting points attention will be focused on some postulates common to classical mechanics and special relativity. Starting from these premises, in the sections The deduction of the form of possible transformations and The Ignatowsky constant it will be shown that the choice between the Galilean scheme and one of the generalized Lorentz type is in fact the only possible one. In a generalized Lorentz scheme, the interactions propagate at a finite velocity VL and the form of the transformations of the space-time coordinates of the events is analogous to those of Lorentz; the only difference is that the limiting speed VL plays the role assumed by the invariance of c, the speed of light in a vacuum, in Lorentz transformations. The line of development of the arguments does not depend directly on electromagnetism, in other words we are dealing with a regulating principle for kinematics and for the set of laws of physics. The assumption VL=c can be assumed from the experimental datum of the invariance of c, i.e. from the validity of Maxwell's equations. Galileo transformations are obtained if and only if the time interval between two events is an invariant for inertial frames of reference, if this interval is not invariant then the transformations are of the generalized Lorentz type. In this framework, the experimental confirmations of the non-invariance of time intervals constitute an indirect confirmation of the generalized Lorentz transformations and therefore of the existence of a limiting velocity for the interactions. During the course of the discussion, a demonstration of the "Reciprocity Lemma" will also be presented, different and simpler than other approaches proposed in the literature [6,7,8].

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Fabiano Minni. 2025-04-06. Limiting velocity and generalized Lorentz trasformations. https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.04617

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Scientific Promise

Scientists constantly face decisions about what lines of research to pursue. This Element introduces the philosophical debate about scientific pursuitworthiness. It explains how it can be rational to pursue a theory even if the theory is less well supported than its rivals, and it discusses existing philosophical frameworks for guiding pursuit decisions. The Element also develops a new perspective. Existing accounts focus predominantly on theories, while experiments are largely neglected. This is an important shortcoming. Theoretical promise depends on experimental promise, and experimental promise raises questions of its own. Drawing on the epistemology of experimentation, the Element advances an account of experimental pursuitworthiness. It is argued that such pursuitworthiness depends on experimental virtues like a clear signal and simplicity of design. Moreover, the kinds of uncertainty that constrain the assessment of scientific pursuits are examined. Finally, the Element highlights open questions in the philosophy of scientific pursuitworthiness.

physics.hist-ph

Is Black Hole Evaporation Prediction Friendly?

Manchak and Weatherall (2018) formulate the black hole information paradox as a failure of predictability in black hole evaporation spacetimes, diagnosed by non-global hyperbolicity. I offer a strategy for resolving this paradox. I argue that failures of predictability in black hole evaporation are not well diagnosed by non-global hyperbolicity. I then consider two weakenings of global hyperbolicity: prediction and retrodiction friendliness, the failure of which could ground a new paradox. However, deidealized black hole evaporation models can be prediction and retrodiction friendly. Therefore, the information paradox cannot be based upon failures of global hyperbolicity, nor either retrodiction or prediction unfriendliness.

physics.hist-ph

The Crab Nebula progenitor: recovering the 1054 AD supernova event as galactic Gamma-ray burst

In 1054 AD a daytime star appeared in the constellation of Taurus, for three weeks, and it was reported in various sources from Europe to China/Japan: it was one of the few documented galactic supernovae of the last two millenia. This paradigm has been established about sixty years ago, as the comprehension of the physics of supernovae progressed with enough observational data. The Gamma-ray bursts were discovered in the same period, but only in the past few years have their observations become daily and their distances have been fully understood as cosmological. After the explosion, the exponential decay of the luminosity in gamma-rays and X-rays has been followed with telescopes onboard dedicated satellites. Also the exponential decay of the afterglow's optical and radio frequencies have been observed with the largest optical and radio telescopes. Within the binary-driven hypernova framework, successful in explaining all the observed phases of the Gamma-ray bursts, the universal exponential decay can be extended to 1000 years after the burst, to account for the present values of Gamma and X-rays as well as optical and radio frequencies of the Crab Nebula. Both the daytime visibility of the burst, and the simultaneous radiation plagues appeared in Constantinople and Cairo is a strong evidence of the presence of Gamma-rays in the lower atmosphere, coming from the same source originating the Crab nebula. The association to the daytime visibility of that star and the following plague meets exactly the etymology of the word dis-aster, bad star.

physics.hist-ph