Thursday, May 26, 2016

relativity - Is the distinction between covariant and contravariant objects purely for the convenience of mathematical manipulation?


Two kinds of indices, covariant and contravariant, are introduced in special relativity. This, as far as I understand, is solely for mathematical luxury, i.e. write expressions in a concise, self-explanatory notation. For example, instead of writing the metric as (Δs)2=c2(Δt)2(Δr)2 one can write xμxμ which is not only a compact notation but also tells us that this expression is Lorentz invariant. But both xμ and xμ, represent same objects: a set of four co-ordinates (ct,x,y,z).


In the case of representations of SU(N), there too appear objects such as ψi and ψi which transform differently but keep ψiψi invariant. But we see that two different kind of objects exist in nature: quarks and anti-quarks which belong to the representations ψi and ψi respectively.



Does it mean in the latter case the distinction between covariant ψi and contravariant ψi is more fundamental than in the former case?




No comments:

Post a Comment

classical mechanics - Moment of a force about a given axis (Torque) - Scalar or vectorial?

I am studying Statics and saw that: The moment of a force about a given axis (or Torque) is defined by the equation: $M_X = (\vec r \times \...