PH

PH--105 : Modern Physics

Contents
Special theory of relativity

Basics of Quantum Mechanics

Reference Books

Relativity

Part

1. Introduction to Special Relativity:

R. Resnik; Wiley Eastern (New Delhi) 1968
2. An Introduction to Mechanics
Mechanics::
D. Kleppner and R.J. Kolenkow (Tata Mc
Graw Hill) 1973
3. Special Relativity:
A. P. French (ELBS and Nelson) 1972

Evaluation Scheme

InIn-semester

(50%)

Quizes

(20% total)

One MidMid-semester (30%)

All tests and midmid-sem are compulsory and no
re
re--exam or compensation in any form will be
given on any ground whatsoever.

End
End--semester (50%)

Modern Physics (How Modern?)

Not

really so modern.

Seeds

ago.

were grown more than a century

Michelson in 1899
The more important fundamental laws and facts
of physical science have all been discovered, and
they are so firmly established that the possibility of
their ever being supplanted in consequence of the
new discoveries is exceedingly remote.Our
future discoveries must be looked for in sixth
place of decimal
Ref: Introduction to Modern Physics : F.K. Richtmyer,
E. H. Kennard, John N. Cooper ( Tata Mc. Graw Hill)
1976, 6th Edition

Some accepted concepts of

Newtonian mechanics

Mass, length and time are frame independent.

There is NO ultimate speed.

Clouds on Classical Physics

The beauty and clearness of the dynamical
theory, which asserts light and heat to be
modes of motion is at present obscured by
two cloudsclouds-Lord Kelvin in 1900
Cloud1: The motion of Earth in Ether
Cloud2: Failure of MaxwellMaxwell-Boltzmann
doctrine regarding Equipartition of Energy

Need of new ideas

Classical

approach did not lead to

solution.

Electromagnetic

theory

Newtonian Mechanics

Classical Statistics

Newer

ideas required.

Clouds

The

first cloud started disappearing

quickly in 1905.

The second needed much more time and
took almost 25 more years to show sign
of dissolution.

This course

Is

meant to give an idea of the failures of

the then wellwell-established Classical
Physics.

Also gives a flavor of the new Physics
that developed after these failures.

Approach

We shall start with the first cloud and

discuss the Special Theory of Relativity
that was developed as a result of it.

We shall then move to the second cloud

and discuss Quantum Theory and then
possibly Quantum Statistics.

Relativity of what?
There are really three theories of relativity:
Relativity pre-Einstein (Galileo)
Special Theory of Relativity (1905)
General Theory of Relativity (1915)

Relativity is concerned with the question:

What is the nature of space and time?

Inertial Frame of Reference

Isolated objects move with constant
Velocity

In Special Theory of Relativity

We shall assume , unless
specifically mentioned, that
observations are being made only
in an inertial frame of reference.
It may be noted that, though earth undergoes a rotational and orbital
motion, for all practical purposes, any set of axes fixed on the earth is
treated as inertial frames of reference.

Absolute space and absolute time:

Suppose that you are on a plane. At 12:00, you leave your seat to
talk to a friend seated a few rows in front of you. At 12:15, you
return to your seat. You might say that: at 12:15, you were at the
same point in space where you were at 12:00. However, what
would a ground-based person claim?
If the plane were going 600 mi/hr, that person might say: at 12:15,
you were at a point in space 150 miles away from where you were
at 12:00.

Who is right? According to Aristotle, space and time are

universal and you have moved.
But the Earth is moving around the Sun, and the Sun around the
Galaxy and the Galaxy is whizzing through space?.

Newtons law

Velocity

is a frame dependent quantity.

Acceleration is same in all inertial
frames.

Newtons law depends on acceleration
and Force.
r
r
F = ma

Two Inertial Frames

y

S r

r (t )

O
z

r
R (t ) O
z

r
r
r
r (t ) = R(t ) + r ' (t )

r
r (t )
x,x

Velocity and Acceleration

r r r
r = R + r
r r r
v = vo + v
r r
a = a

Newtons Law in Different Frames

r
r
F = ma
Force is normally expected to be frame
independent

Newtons law is valid in all inertial

frames
From this law, velocity can be evaluated in any
frame, if needed.
We must specify the frame to know the
velocity.

Galilean Newtonian relativity

ball dropped by the passenger

For both the passenger (the moving observer) and the ground observer,
Newtons law is found to be valid, though the paths are different. By doing this
experiment, the passenger cannot say definitely that I am moving or I am at rest.

Conservation laws too

Since laws of conservation of linear momentum,

angular momentum and kinetic energy follow
Newtons laws, these conservation laws too hold
good in all inertial frames, though the numerical
values of these dynamical quantities are different
in different (inertial) frames.

Problem No. 1

Lorentz

force is velocity dependent.

r
r r r
F = q(E + v B)

Consequence

S is an observer on the ground

S is an observer on the train moving with a constant velocity v

According to S frame, the Lorentz force, Fmag on

r
v
is non zero. Therefore, the induced emf = Fmag .d l
But, according to S' frame (moving frame), Fmag = 0, though
there is an emf in the loop.
Just a coincidence???
Is this due to an accidental symmetry ?
But the classical Doppler effect of sound is not symmetrical !

Problem No. 2
Speed of light in vacuum is a fundamental constant, given by
c=

0 0

0 = electric permittivity of free space/vacuum (8.85 10 -12 C 2 /Nm 2 )

0 = magnetic permeability of free space/vacuum (4 10 -7 N/m 2 )
so that c = 3 10 8 m/s

Is Speed of light frame

dependent?
r
u

r
u

Classically, the relative speed should be different in the above two cases,
contradicting the notion that c is a fundamental constant.

If yes

Are

fundamental constants o and o

frame dependent?

That

means basic electric and magnetic

forces are also frame dependent.

Or is it that?

The

following expression valid only in

some specific frame?
c=

o o

The Second Option implies

All

the inertial frames, though equivalent

from mechanical point of view are not
equivalent from electromagnetic point of
view.

A special inertial frame may then exist,
which can be identified as absolute rest.
rest.

What is your pick?

Do you allow fundamental constants to
become frame dependent?
Or
You allow a special inertial frame?
Ideally None?
But if there is no other choice given, one
is likely to prefer lesser evil, which is the
second choice.

Ether

Earlier

ideas favored the concept of a

special frame.

It also favored the usual notion that a
medium is necessarily required for wave
propagation.

It was imagined that the universe is filled
with ocean of ether. It was assumed to
be at absolute rest and the earth moves
relative to that.

Implications

All

planets, stars, galaxies float in ether.

The speed of light is c only in this
medium as given by the expression
involving fundamental constants.

In other frames (such as the earth), the
speed of light could be different from c.
One can determine the speed of the
frame by measuring the speed of light in
that frame, by the relative velocity eqn.

Implications

Going by the speed of sound (330 m/s in air) in

various media, the ether should be extremely rigid
to support such a large value for c, yet allowing the
earth and other objects to move freely

Broader Implication

Though

all the inertial frames are

equivalent from mechanical point of
view, they need not be from the
electromagnetic point of view.

But is there any process, which is purely
mechanical?

Is it Chance?

Is

it only by chance that nature has made

mechanical processes equivalent in
inertial frames but not the
electromagnetic processes?
Are you Happy with the situation?
Look at Experiments

Michelson Morley Experiment

Can

we experimentally measure different

speeds of light in different frames?

Attempt

was unsuccessful.

Idea behind the experiment

Let AB=l
The apparatus, fixed to the earth
moves in ether.
Relative to the apparatus, the
velocity of light along AB is c-v and
along BA it is c+v.
Total time taken for the round trip is
t=l/(c-v) + l/(c+v)
Let t0 be the time when there is no
movement in ether. i.e., t0=2l/c
Then, t-t0 2(l/c)(v2/c2), which is too
small to be observed because the
orbital speed of earth (v) is only 30
km/s

Michelson - Morely experiment

Interferometric technique
M2

v
l2

l1

M1

M, M1 and M2 are mirrors. The apparatus moves with a

speed v (earths speed) in ether.

For the path MM1M, as shown in the earlier

2l1
1

.
slide, the time t1 =
2
2
c (1 v / c )
For the path MM2M, since the mirrors M and M2
have a horizontal dispalcement, the time taken is

2l2
1

.
t2 =
c 1 v 2 / c 2
It is clear that, t = (t 2 - t1 ) 0, even if l1 = l 2
Rotating the apparatus, the new time differenc is t'
The fact that t and t' are different should give a fringe shift.

Result of MM experiment

The fringe shift was zero.

This implies either (i
(i) there is no ether drift
(v=0) or (ii) there is no ether at all.
It was shown by experiments that the first
option is not possible.
Ruling out the existence of ether actually rules
out the concept of a frame that is at absolute
rest. That is, there is no special inertial frame.

Clue from electromagnetism

According to Einstein, the result of the coil-magnet experiment
was not a coincidence. He noted The observable phenomena
here depend only on the relative motion between the coil and
the magnet, against the customary view that draws a sharp
distinction between the two cases. Examples like this suggest,
electrodynamics, like mechanics, possesses no properties
corresponding to the idea of absolute rest.

Postulates of Special Theory of Relativity

Laws

of Physics are same in all inertial

frames of references. No preferred
inertial frame exists.

The

speed of light c is same in all

inertial frames.

First Postulate Implies

No

absolute rest.

No absolute velocities.

No ether.

Space is filled with nothing.

We require something real to which we
can attach our frame of reference and
only with respect to that frame we can
talk of velocities.

Second Postulate implies

r
u

r
u

Both the observers will tell the same value for c, against the usual
velocity addition law.

correct

v
c-v

WRONG

v
c

CORRECT

Quote from Prof. Herman Bondi:

Bondi:
The special theory of relativity is a necessary
consequence of any assertion that the unity
of Physics is essential, for it would be
intolerable for all inertial systems to be
equivalent from dynamical point of view yet
distinguishable by optical measurements...

New Approach Needed

Relative

velocity formula requires

modification.

A new formulation is needed which can
ensure that the speed of light is same in
all the inertial frames.

The new formulation must be consistent
with the first postulate

Summary

Absolute rest and absolute speed are wrong

notions.
Speed of light in vacuum, which is the highest
for any wave, does not obey the usual rules of
relative velocity.
There is an ultimate speed, against what we
thought in the beginning (classical).