Szczególna teoria wzgl■dno■ci Notatki

z wyk■adu 1st Edition Leszek

Soko■owski
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookstep.com/product/szczegolna-teoria-wzglednosci-notatki-z-wykladu-1st-e
dition-leszek-sokolowski/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Szczególna teoria wzgl■dno■ci notatki z wyk■adu Leszka

M Soko■owskiego Leszek M Soko■owski

https://ebookstep.com/product/szczegolna-teoria-wzglednosci-
notatki-z-wykladu-leszka-m-sokolowskiego-leszek-m-sokolowski/

C■a■■■ ■■ ■opo■e■c■■a ■a■■o■■■ ■■■ ■o■■■■x ■ ■a■e■

1st Edition Leszek Ko■akowski

https://ebookstep.com/download/ebook-43495642/

■■■■■■■■■■■■■ Z 1st Edition ■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■

https://ebookstep.com/download/ebook-51595334/

Nikon Z 6II 1st Edition Frank Späth

https://ebookstep.com/product/nikon-z-6ii-1st-edition-frank-
spath/
X Y Z 1st Edition Carolina Tobar

https://ebookstep.com/product/x-y-z-1st-edition-carolina-tobar/

Teoria da Música Vademecum da Teoria Musical 5th

Edition Bohumil Med

https://ebookstep.com/product/teoria-da-musica-vademecum-da-
teoria-musical-5th-edition-bohumil-med/

Krótki traktat z ontologii przej■ciowej 1st Edition

Alain Badiou

https://ebookstep.com/product/krotki-traktat-z-ontologii-
przejsciowej-1st-edition-alain-badiou/

Tarama Sözlü■ü U Z Tdk

https://ebookstep.com/product/tarama-sozlugu-u-z-tdk/

Medizinische Fachwörter von A Z 1st Edition Anna Marie

Seitz

https://ebookstep.com/product/medizinische-fachworter-von-
a-z-1st-edition-anna-marie-seitz/
Leszek M. SokoBowski

SZCZegolnateona wzglednosci
Notatkizwyktadu
ctA ct

7 Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagielliskiego

 yue nop poT L0T
KIoH po e& T6
h1gB po L
ouoLMvIspazid| Suo[MvjspozId Kuo po 9 0&
njop po 8T
vN ZSIOLM
eeiId
RECENZENT
Prof dr hab Marek Rogatko

PROJEKT OKLADK

i Informa-
Publikacja dofinansowana przez Uniwersytet Jagielloriski ze [rodków WydziaBu Fizyki, Astronomii
tyi Stosowanej

o Copyright by Leszek M. SokoBowski & Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu JagielloDskiego

Wydanie I. Kraków 2019

All rights reserved

i rozpowszechniany
Niniejszy utwór ani |adenjego fragment nie mo|e byé reprodukowany, przetwarzany
i in-
w jakikolwiek sposób za pomoc urzdzern elektronicznych, mechanicznych, kopiujcych, nagrywajcych
bez uprzedniej pisemnej zgody
nych oraz nie mo|e by¢ przechowywany w |adnym systemie informatycznym
Wydawey.

ISBN 978-83-233-4715-6

ISBN 978-83-233-7000-0 (e-book)

wYDAWNICTWO

UNIWERSYTETU
JAGIELLONSKIEGO
www.wuj.pl

Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellonskiego

Redakcja: ul. MichaBowskiego 9/2, 31-126 Kraków
tel. 12-663-23-80, fax 12-663-23-83

Dystrybucja: tel. 12-631-01-97, tel./fax 12-631-01-98

tel. kom. 506-006-674, e-mail: sprzedaz@wuj,pl
Konto: PEKAO SA, nr 80 1240 4722 1111 0000 4856 3325
LO
co
Przedmowa
Szczególna teoria wzgldno[ci jest tradycyjnie wykBadana jako fragment tego dziaBu
fizyki, w którym pojawiBa si w wyniku eksperymentu (Michelsona-Morleya), czyli
w elektrodynamice. W cigu stu nastpnych lat okazaBa si bazow teori dla wszyst
kich zjawisk i form materii, bowiem wszelka materia jest relatywistyczna. Teori t, jak
ka|d inn teori fizyczn, mo|na w peBni zrozumie i wyrazi w najbardziej adekwat-
nym systemie poj, gdy spojrzy si na ni z perspektywy obejmujcej j teorii bardziej
uniwersalnej. OkazaBo si, |e STW jest bardzo szczególnym przypadkiem (tzw. rozwi-
zaniem podstawowym) ogólnej teorii wzgldno[ci, czyli teorii oddziaBywaDgrawitacyj
nych. Jest to przypadek szczególny, a zarazem fundamentalny dla naszego istnienia i po-
znania [wiata, bowiem w silnych i szybko zmiennych polach grawitacyjnych powstanie
i przetrwanie znanych nam organizmów jest wtpliwe, a gdyby nawet odmienne istoty
inteligentne mogly w nich istnie, to napotkaByby du|o wiksze trudno[ci w sformuBo-
waniu jakichkolwiek praw fizyki.
Pomijamyzatem grawitacj, lecz patrzymy z perspektywy OTWi formuBujemy W
jako geometri specyficznej - pBaskiej - czasoprzestrzeni. U|ywamy aparatu geometrii

analitycznej i algebry tensorów, co prowadzi do nadania wBa[ciwej rangi niezmiennikom

geometrycznym. W takim ujciu transformacja Lorentza, której rola w tradycyjnym wy-
ktadzie jest nadmiernie wyeksponowana, wraca na wBa[ciwe jej miejsce. Podej[cie geo-
metryczne daje gBbsze zrozumienie zjawisk relatywistycznych i eliminuje praktycznie
wszystkie paradoksy, towarzyszce STW od jej narodzin i dajce jej wtpliw sBaw.
Uzupenieniem podej[cia geometrycznego jest uwzglednienie gBbokiego zwizku (do
dzis nie w peBni zrozumianego) zjawisk relatywistycznych i fizyki kwantowej. Bez u-
wzglednienia fizyki czstek elementarnych i jder atomowych samo istnienie uniwer
salnej i inwariantnej prdko[ci oddziaBywaD fundamentalnych jest trudnym do zrozu-
mienia dziwactwem przyrody. Bez zjawisk kwantowych, w których masa spoczynkowa
czstek elementarnych zamienia si w energi (i na odwrót), kinematyka relatywistycz-
na byBaby uBomna.
Takie sformuBowanie STW pojawiBo si w literaturze [wiatowej w ostatnich deka-
dach, lecz ksi|ki te s trudno dostpne polskim studentom. Wstpnym zapeBnieniem
tej luki ma by ten skrypt, adresowany do studentów drugiego roku fizyki i astronomi.
Skrypt ten stanowi notatki do jednosemestralnego wykladu STw. Obejmuje on ma-
teriat, któryz trudem moge wyBo|y w dost pnym czasie. ZrezygnowaBem zatem z przed-
stawienia czasoprzestrzeni Galileusza fizyki nierelatywistycznej, mimo |e jest ona bar-
dzo pouczaj cym przykBadem, i| geometria Minkowskiego jest konstrukcyjnie od niej
prostsza. Podaje jedynie rudymenty mechaniki relatywistycznej, bez formalizmu La-
grange'a i Hamiltona. Kinematyk relatywistyczn ograniczyBem do minimum, bowiem
wBa[ciwym miejscem jej prezentacji jest wykBad fizyki czstek elementarnych. Skrypt za-
chowat telegraficzny styl notatek do wykBadu. Zawiera sporo powtórzeD, które psuj ele-

9
 yreMÁRerzppo joe]sod [anarquoy ejsanyo aru are u
-3JPI yeMágeLzppo åuuiog eu eruazo{ueiao epepreu tuG .uaznsoz1dosezo eLnauuoa9
o3apysnoyun
uazsysazudosvzo ypfuziyuos8 yazpiaznj uassks kuvnoaudsauz auznf o1 MISs
I elorugaa
(auzoásep
DYTUeypau ezsnarPo {uaznsaz1dosezo [ounnjosqe po euzoI isaf { PÁzy kusos (euzoju
-Puspau) euynjosqe isal-G 1sol yaznsazidosezo 1{oe1Me3 9sousaqoau M MIS
CG osopSMouiN YAZNsazIdosezo - eysezd 1saf yaznsaz1dosezo o1
9buuod euzou aulkoeymes3 aqej ! IuaNeu aulkoeymei3 euemágeyzppo Áp3 :MLO
(yoÁuTejuaueja yeistry Ámoprepueis japon) 3qPis 1aus 'auz>íjaus
-Buonyeja eyuemÁfeyzppo oyti -geujuod afoeLMel8 euzouu yokureuauajo xoistz
aMopel aoÁzy M = eqe}s Isaf eloeismeis fa191 M °2eLM^YoazsM p_$zo M kualkz
nyonqám O3
-opjeIM azIHqod 'An1zp fourezo gsOMIjqoso :eu|is 1saf e{oesmeis qpÁi91 M "eysiMelz
oenime3 Afys aobzony 3obzemoumg01 1o5o1skzàuds Áys u blep aModoysoneui
eyero efefeds [ureuuoje Ázpåju auzoÁiauaeuonmoje As = aModoysoneu eyeio èlojuns
(9ezsniod àys Auazou) Fuiayz eue8tyokz1d dpis Áuafnuoxod æqejs isaf efpeymeio
SEO1 EZ= 4/4 quu kzpðju eysaMouo
-Mau eulkoenLMes8 egis-3J "uauojoid. wauonypja izpôyu euzoÁouaeuonypjo eys-y
yofueuouepunj yeMÁJeIZppo z uuÁzsqessfeu 1saf efoeiumei9
AueMoy|duoys isal 1{oesme13 1osouaqo m ypÁuzokzy m9sasoid sido
MOypni yII YOÁuz3Ázy mo1ya1qo yokuzo1 isal a! 'a[ki 'quaznsaz1d
-OSeZ yAuzo1 ajoLm auazoyoysaru alarust = (aju Màjs .uísbfnpfeuz jueyeo z afneyzp
po 'uzoyureuáp uavypyqo 1saf 'Kuz»kzy iyajqo kasjoMs o1 yaznsazidosezo MIO
aUzIY
-Áoads bs ouz>ízoußeuonyojo I aqeys *aups aueuauepuny ejueMezppo ayeisozod
oyulkoeime13 ofngerzppo oo o1 1saf euaNeW = *aqulkoeymer3 afngerzppo 9BMizeyazid
of Aobsou! påd 1àj31aua Kobsoju ya1qo ápzey :(MLO) p50upåazm puoa1 eup3o
npàd qniyi 181ou9 zeyaz1d = 9EMÁeIzppo azou Ap8 alous -[uzokzy 1yo1qo
ILLOJPI ÀULoy bujomop z02id aueMOJoua8 afuemáeizppo aues1aM[un - efpenmeio
*auz>Ázy Ásao01d apy1sAzsm dys bfemár8zo1 (o19 eu 'euaos - yaznsazidosezo
-[hoenme3 yemÁrejzppo .osousaqoau M [uaznsaz1dosezo .o_ousezm eu03] 0] 1saf
(M.IS) pSoupàj@zm eyo) eu19Bazzs TI
e.uoIsa[upo ápepn. yaznsazadosez) 'I
 Okre[leniem oddziaBywaD materii zgodnych z geometri M4 zajmuj si klasyczna oraz
kwantowa teoria pola = oddziaBywania musz mie charakter polowy.
W tym wykBadzie
zajmujemy si fizycznymi konsekwencjami geometrii M czyli ki-
nematyk zjawisk fizycznych. Na koDcu zajmiemy si podstawami mechaniki relatywi.
stycznej.

1.2. CzasoprzestrzeD

Jej konstrukcj podajemy stopniowo, w kilku wykBadach.

CzasoprzestrzeD to ,iloczyn kartezjaDski" czas przestrzeD.
x

Najbardziej fundamentalny (elementarny) opis dowolnego zjawiska fizycznego to:

-

lokalizacja w przestrzeni podanie relacji do innych rozciglych ciaB,

=

umieszczenie w cigu nastpstw zdarzeD

To
(porzdek czasowy).
jeszczenies wspóBrzdne (t, x, y.2) bo nie mamy ukBadu
wspóBrzdnych.
-

Umieszczenie w czasie i
przestrzeni uniwersalna charakterystyka zjawisk fizycznych,
-

dopiero na ich podstawie wprowadza si specyficzne wielko[ci fizyczne: T,v, ci[nienie

P. pola E iH.
Nowo|ytna koncepcja czasui przestrzeni:
L Newton 1687,
,Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica", po ,Definicjach" na-
stepuje,Scholium" (.Obja[nienia"):
1) Czas absolutny, prawdziuy i matematyczny, sam z siebiei przez suw
równomiernie bez zwiqzku z natur wptywa
niem.
czymkolwviek zewntrznym i inaczej nazywa si trwa
2) PrzestrzeD absolutna, przez swq bez zwizku
natur, z
czymkolwiek zewntrznym
zostaje zawsze taka sama i nieruchoma. po-

Definicja Newtona-filozoficznainieoperacyjna. Zasada

strzeD nie jest absolutna bo nie istnieje wzgldno[ci Galileusza = prze-
spoczynek
-

Mechanika klasyczna jest formuBowana w absolutny = ruch jest wzgldny.

nej od koncepcji Newtona. W czasoprzestrzeni czasoprzestrzeni
Galileusza odmien- -

Galileusza nie ma absolutnej

przestrzennej zdarzeD nierónoczesnych, jest tylko absolutny przedziaB czasu odlegBo[ci
nimi. Dla zdarzeD równoczesnych ich
odlegBo[ przestrzenna jest absolutna. midzy
Przyktad: odlegBo[ przestrzenna i czasowa Krakowa i Warszawy w ukBadzie
Ziemi i pocigu jadcego midzy nimi. odniesienia
(WBasno[ci czasoprzestrzeni Galileusza w tym kursie nie omawiam;
ne w
miarodajnym wykBadzie STW W. KopczyDskiego i A. Trautmana,s one przedstawio-
igrawitacja"', PWN, Warszawa 1981.) ,CzasoprzestrzeD
Einstein: wBasno[ci czasu i przestrzeni trzeba bada
a priori. empirycznie a nie filozoficznie

12
O
 i Einsteina (OTW) maj
Wszystkie czasoprzestrzenie w fizyce: Galileusza, Minkowskiego
te same pierwsze trzy struktury, takie same jak przestrzeD euklidesowa E". Ró|ni si

metryk - okre[leniem odlegBo[ci.

Wymiar czasoprzestrzeni: dim M4 = 4- pojcie topologiczne, empirycznie wprowa-
dza si go za pomoc ukBadów wspóBrzdnych.
Eksperyment: dim =3+1 - prawo Ptolemeusza. Ptolemeusz: operacyjna definicja
dowol-
wymiaru przestrzeni liczba wspóBrzdnych koniecznych do zidentyfikowania
=

nego punktu w przestrzeni fizycznej. Prawo Ptolemeusza - jedyne uniwersalne prawo

fizyki, które przetrwaBo ze staro|ytrno[ci.

Geometria ró|niczkowa:
identyfikacja punktów za pomoc uktadów wspótrzdnych.
CzasoprzestrzeD pokryta jest mapami.
Mapa: para (U, ¢), U - otwarty zbiór (obszar) w czasoprzestrzeni, dziedzina mapy,
- homeomorfizm obszaru Uw R', :U-- p(U) E R' ukBad wspóBrzdnych w danej
mapie.
peU- zdarzenie elementarne, ¢lp) = x = (t.x, y,z) wspóBrz dne punktu w mapie.
PunktxE R' identyfikujemy z cigiem 4 liczb.
ZaBo|enie: czasoprzestrzeD STW = Mi ma topologi R' i do jej pokrycia wystarczy
jednamapa U = M.
Uktad wspóBrzdnych o nie jest jednoznaczny: w M, mo|na wprowadzi nieskoD-
czenie wiele ró|nych ukBadów wspóBrzdnych. WBasno[ci geometryczne figur w prze
strzeni (np. w E) nie zale| od wyboru uktadu wspóBrzdnych wBasno[ci fizyczne
zjawisk nie zale| od wyboru ukadu wspóBrzdnych b
PrzestrzeD euklidesowa ES ma symetri translacyjn i obrotow > s wyró|nione
uktady wspóBrzdnych: kartezjaDskie, troch sferyczne.
My ma du| symetri = istniej w niej wyró|nione uktady wspóBrz dnych.
W fizycznej czasoprzestrzeni rozmaite ukBady wspóBrz dnych wprowadzamy za po-
moc ukBadów odniesienia.

1.4. Linie [wiata

Ka|de ciaBo o okre[lonych rozmiarach ma cigB sekwencj zdarzeD tworz cych jego
caB histori - przeszB i przyszB.
Ciata punktowe - idealny punkt materialny, cz stki elementarne: e, 4, 7, kwarki, neu-
trina-zakreslaj w czasoprzestrzeni cigl krzyw 1-wymiarow : lini [wiata.
Obiekty 1-wymiarowe (struny) - zakre[laj w czasoprzestrzeni powierzchni 2-wy-

miarow - wstg [wiata.

Obiekty 2-wymiarowe (,membrany") maj histori która jest 3-wymiarowa.
Byty 3-wymiarowe - wycinaj w czasoprzestrzeni tunele [wiata.

14
 s u o = L op 09 aupo32. ouemoxnpoida1 bs - Kresind aobfnism 'uaiz
AmoiM yonI 'aMouoJE Área3z 'noremy MoJeizsÁny afoejdoso :aMoIeßaz kuz ueyoaW
JuuÁuzoÁporod .uu
-EysLME{Z uIÁuu. 01 Áuezpmeids isuoo = L saIyo oBo[ :ouzoápo;uad ajsios oysLMelz
AFeis isaf saryo oßal Azo "9YPisn
Áuazou au '(myseid od àys eobzo01 PN}Id) 9souzoipáo oyIÁI - BUzoÁzy oxs;mesz oupaf
uzoApo
-ad ajstos (øuezrejmod) auz»ipYÁa eysIMelz anreurzo1 blatu1s :ÁuzaÁIdua 1ensod
nSezo
MApdn Aoezzouu kuzskzy pepn = Jeiaz keaaz Áuvzozsa un on 1paIs yOezzm M
nsezo JBIUOd 9'I
Kureluiod afoeniks àI nsezo po bzajez .oo!s [uuerzåm Ázpðju jo_oßopo! epmoJu"
saf Monåid 9ajs = e{lojuis/ au auMÁIzs egeo MLO M uku[íoejLMers njod uukurs M
On o8uep wapåszM e.uIzIepz euuaznsazid efoez1eyoj isaf oL 31s;MÁzD
-az1Áqzo}| o (2 *) aupàzypdsm =0- {ouuspsazs pajs uouoy 1equuzoi íorue18M
pas egzàM oß»zsz|9{eu (zf'x) .MOIaunu = aupåz4odsm eur aMOIYUnd aruezrepz
uuajuuáMm es 2 .{'* Áqzo| = ejs38 Isal
aIs zK'x ureqzo| ¬ Áuofniounu pojs AgzåM buuajosazs poys ÁunerajqÁm ápoBÁM eIa
euzokpuio euzokiojs euuojo_azs :1pa1s a;nauoss .
1391s urezàm kzpaju joso3o1po kuezoeuzkm eoouod yoi ez :azou1o{u Ayånd èfarunsT
01S eu aueiomim ÁjS .{Oeuuojap zaq bfnukznám a101N 'O [uzord m
epems 1osoxpåid po ezs[oruu 1saf ezà1d iqund ua;mad eu Agys uayuegerzpEz oßoueyomÁM
a nyamzp 9s0xpåid) auMÁIzs ajeuoysop au are 'aumáizs Kaänd blaruns :auazoez
ajam oosalon {v3az m vuozvsodim uazs4sazid
a v n åzs vobfv3bzos noiàsd (9a1s) vozumojvy umizzs =M.LS m vuajsajupo pvpin
auzoAzy usznsazid ejuuím kuzoknyejo younpej du '3uoziouu ès ukr
-913 M On nioqim bzojez aju ouzokzy 1osoyjam a9YpIu :áueuoxÁM 1saf u i I y M 'On
po kzaez neuod yuám 1930 PN PeLMs (nsdo) eueßez.nsod oamoyneu uauauajo
wsupaqzaju 1sal on aueMÁsIdo1safauzaízy oystmelz ouep on uii m [o1osdzofeu On
wAUMad M euomeIsn 1sal eMOJejuod enerede epzey uaymoq '(on) euajsafupo ayzp
-epn uÁuz>Ázy uÁumad m íueMÁuoyím azsMez 1s0[ yoÁuzokzy 1osoxjaIM Iejuod
euojsajupo ápepin SI
yznsaz1d yel- ezsbp 1saf yaznsazidosez) equoziopz -9eujoazid
ors bBou eems ojurT ypÁmoyund yaskezo ejeims yuy z euexn 1saf uoznszidosez)
 91
:0elndájSeu o1 ðIs ereisn'ues pre] azsSMez
1saf op y z mojazid yo SeZI aZ 'OuopeLM
yoAI9IY O Areusís a az}m M eeßaz op ejÁsÁm .paJS yaizàm mà.s ÁDb[npleuz eaaz yoaIN
C.ouMg") ayduo
wÁupoßz M ep. kre3az yok1o17 M ejuajsa[upo Apen bloyunst :kuzoÁIduua enisod
aqas wapåjßzm auoyonau bs Áre3»z appsÁzsm On uÁuep M
M9aeßoz efoezuozyouás 2'II
1aIS a1zðM uÁpzexM 'moreaaz ajoLm auazaYOYsau JÁq
Isnu on usuep M< A{Bapo Jeßaz 9íq o1 azou aIN 'e.uIzIepz nas{aruuMOn uÁuep m
Koesemizoods e3az zaz1d kuezeysm sezo = o3aujejuauour euaziepz eo_{ez ejiMYO =
"yazrepze{ouapí»ujoy- nsezo . .u»znsazid Áieuod
faisoid àiniynns eu erßaz oßapzey Sez)
v3z Auqop Azsou o3 o1 = svz» Auziza
punyos go d.S [ÁYppo uajomod z . dy{eues eu
Auoyza;mazid 'nyie1s
N8uy z
a{uesájoy ! ÁseznsM eu Áuiodpo nauouoiss :z9LI uos;uIeH uyof
[ouzoyei3oa3 1o_o8nyp niejuod
apojau euzoalkzn ! buz»kiqeid" ez epoiaeu '1oy
apnilsuoj:bILI PMs[KÁIq juauueued
(4 ZI aju
Teyo) eoyojs ejuemoioa o3aujeyoj uajuauou z ,0 nyiupnjod eu o8auomejseu eie߻z
yezeysM a.ueumoiod :nziou eu
[auzoyeiaoaa /o_oanp ajuezoeuzÁm eu qosods Áuápaf
e;uOJSIH
ouzindumaz ÁAs eu (e{udojs
=
oßauMad op) Anzoau 'uíuz»ípouad ajsjos nysLme{z eu Áuedo Jeßaz Je3az
kaqoa
(uaIz uÁu{koei[meis njod m opeqem) [uÁuznðuMaz [ueys Kuemoyuniemn
Áq 3zou ou eresaz uzjueypajN oßauzsápoLuad ajsios eys;Me{z apgáo ezoI|z Ieaaz
aupnn isal
Eedoz o3apyer auemopnqz yoju z oßoupal po ejoiqpo es auezoyz 'ajujonojan you po
os PqpoFpeioia;mz yoÁg8ojouM9I nmp op ajpedojsoid djsezsniod uoioj euaaaueT
-EUjoJsu!g kmouojojeaaz alajus. = Jsuo =o [uz9Id m epeLMs 9_oxpåid zemajuod
O
3) Quasi-statyczny transport zegarów.
Zegary A i B synchronizujemy w jednym miejscu a nast pnie zegar B poruszamy
quasi-statycznie na dan odlegBo[ I.
t-czas podró|y zegara B mierzony przez nieruchomy zegar A, v const - pr dko[

przesuwania B wzgl dem A.

STW: Czas podró|y mierzony przez ruchomy zegarB jest
tEV1-(vlc)2t - dylatacjaczasu.

v«Ct-tE t-t1-2())) vt =l = t-t= 0 dla v- 0-ró|nica dowolnie

maBa (wymaga to t - oo).

1.8. Inercjalne ukBady odniesienia

Postulat empiryczny: w nieobecno[ci grawitacji w zbiorze wszystkich UO istnieje
klasa ukBadów wyró|nionych - Inercjalne ukBady odniesienia.

Definicja 4.
Inercjalnym uktadem odniesienia (IUO) nazywamy UO, w którym:

przestrzen mierzona pr tami mierniczymi ma w ka|dym miejscu lokalnie geome-

trie przestrzeni euklidesowej ijest w kaidym kierunku nieograniczona » ma topo-
logie przestrzeni R° => przestrzeD fizyczna jest matemarycznie modelowana prze-
strzeni euklidesouw ES,
we wszystkich miejscach w przestrzeni zegary id wzgodnym tempie, zatem istnieje
jeden wspólny czas dla tego ukladu i czas ten jest (w ka|dym miejscu) jednorodny.

Czas jest wsz dzie jednorodny: dowolne zjawisko fizyczne izolowane (wolne od dzia-
tania siB zewn trznych) powtórzone wielokrotnie w tych samych warunkach fizycznych
(te same warunki na pocz tku tego zjawiska i na jego przestrzennym brzegu) przebie-
ga jednakowo i ma za ka|dym razem te same wszystkie charakterystyki liczbowe, w tym
czas trwania tego zjawiska. Tak jest w ka|dym miejscu.
PrzykBad: czas Badowania akumulatora o okre[lonej pojemno[ci pr dem o ustalonym
napi ciu i nat |eniu jest taki sam niezale|nie od tego, gdzie i kiedy to si odbywa.
IUO istnieje tylko w czasoprzestrzeni Minkowskiego - geometrycznie jest to czaso-

przestrzeD pBaska (nie ma grawitacji).

KontrprzykBady - IUO nie istnieje w czasoprzestrzeniach zakrzywionych.

1) Pole grawitacyjne Stonca (jest statyczne), bierzemy U0, w którym SBoDce jest nieru-
chome. PrzestrzeD (i czasoprzestrzeD) jest zakrzywiona - nie jest E*. Zegary nie id
równo: blisko StoDca czas pBynie wolniej ni| na Ziemi - linie emisyjne pierwiastków

na powierzchni SBoDca obserwowane na Ziemi s przesuni te do fal dhu|szych. Czy

liw ka|dym miejscu w przestrzeni jest inny czas (zale|nie od odlegBo[ci od StoDca)

18
 i ka|dy czas jest jednorodny -

czas trwania dowolnego zjawiska nie zale|y od mo0

mentu jego rozpoczcia.

2) Kosmologiczna czasoprzestrzeD Friedmanna naszego Wszechswiata. Przestrzen jest

ES, a zarazem rozszerza si, bowiem wszystkie odlegBo[ci pomidzy wzajemnie nie-
ruchomymi ciaBami rosn. Ten wzrost odleglo[ci powoduje, |e czas przelotu sygnatu
(6wiata)pomidzy odleghymi ciaBami te| ro[nie i powy|sze kryterium wskazujce, |e
Zegary nie id zgodnie, nie stosuje si. Istnieje inne kryterium, geometryczne, wska-
zujce, |e zegary tkwice nieruchomow rozszerzaj cej si przestrzeni, id w równym
tempie i czasoprzestrzeD ta ma jeden wspólny czas. Obserwacje astronomiczne od-
legtych galaktyk daj, |e ten czas jest niejednorodny i czas trwania takich samych
zjawisk zale|y od momentu ich rozpoczcia.

Kontrprzyktady te ujawniaj, |e powy|sza definicja IUO, intuicyjna i odwohujca si

do pomiarów, jest nie[cisBa i niekompletna. Poprawna definicja IUO podaje matema-
tyczny model IU0 i jest sformuBowana w jezyku geometrii czasoprzestrzeni Minkow
skiego. Podamy ja pózniej. NajpeBniejszego opisu IUO dostarcza OTW.
TUO jest zdefiniowany geometrycznie jako pewien obiekt w czasoprzestrzeni, a nie
dynamik zjawisk w nim opisywanych. IU0 jest fizycznie wyró|nionyi wa~ny-bo w nim
procesy dynamiczne - zarówno ruch ciaB pod dziaBaniem rozmaitych siBt, jak i inne pro-

cesy (elektromagnetyczne, termodynamiczne), maj najprostszy opis.

WIUO s tylko siBy oddzialywaD midzy ciaBami, nie ma sit bezwBadno[ciwynikaja
cych z nieinercjalno[ci UO (np. sily ods[rodkowej w ukBadzie wirujcym).
Postulat empiryczny: w IUO obowi zuje I zasady dynamiki Newtona - ciaBo swo-
bodne (wolne od oddzialywaD z innymi obiektami) porusza si ruchem jednostajnym
prostoliniowym.
Std: ka|dy inny ruch jest wywoBany sit zewntrzn bdc przejawem oddziaBywanía.
Przyspieszony ruch rakiety jest wynikiem siBy zewn trznej - siBy odrzutu wyrzucanych
zjej silnika gazów. CaBy ukBad zBo|ony z rakiety i jej gazów porusza si jako jeden obiekt
jednostajnie i prostoliniowo (ruchjego [rodka masy).
Niech F-sita dziaBajca na dane ciaBo ze strony innych ciaB. Wtedy mamy niezale|ny
postulat empiryczny: w IUO obowi zuje II zasada dynamiki Newtona - trajektoria ciaBa
x(0) pod dziaBaniem siky F dana jest równaniem

Dla F=0 mamy v = const, ale warunkiem koniecznym shuszno[ci II zasady jest praw
dziwos I zasady- I zasada nie wynikaz I, s tylko spójne.
Uwaga.
WIUOjego czas jest jednorodny, a przestrzeD jest E przestrzeD jest jednorodna

19
 w M^ mamy kie-
wynika, |e caBa czasoprzestrzeD jest izotropowa
-

tropowa. Std nie

runki czasowe, przestrzenne i zerowe (definicja dalej).
Geometryczna definicja IUO istnieje oo wiele IUO o tych samych wBasno[ciach.
Je|eli uktad S jest IUO, to ka|dy ukBad S' poruszaj cy si wzgl dem S jednostajnie pro-
stoliniowo (V= const) jest te| 1U0. To nie wynika z I zasady dynamiki.
W praktyce laboratoryjnej: IUO wyznaczamy metodami dynamicznymi - czy speB-
niona jest I zasada dynamiki, np. za pomoc |yroskopu sprawdzamy, czy UO nie wiruje.
W ka|dym IUO przestrzeD jest ES » najwygodniejsze s wspóBrzdne kartezjaDskie
a. y, z. Ale to nie jest konieczno[ - mo|na u|ywa wspóBrzdnych sferycznych (r,0,p)
lub innych krzywoliniowych.
STW jest prawdziwa, je|eli czasoprzestrzeD ma geometri Minkowskiego, nie jest ko-
nieczne, by IUO mo|na byBo efektywnie zbudowa w danym obszarze czasoprzestrzeni.
uO nie da si skonstruowa we wnetrzu gwiazd-gor ca (T> 10 K) i gesta plazma
czstek elementarnych, ale STW tam obowizuje.
Pytanie: czy w zbiorze IUO istnieje wyró|niona podklasa UO, w których prawa fizyki
s jeszcze prostsze?
Nie. Wszystkie IUO s równoprawne.
 2. Zasada wzgldno[ci
2.1. Zasada wzgldno[ci Galileusza-Einsteina
STW opiera si na dwóch postulatach:
- zasadzie wzgl dno[ci,

staBo[ci prdko[ci [wiata w pró|ni.

Zasada wzgldno[ci Galileusza-Einsteina:

Prawa fizyki s we wszystkich IUO takie same, ukBady te ró|ni si

midzy sob tylko kinematyczniewopisie zjawisk.
Ruch jednostajny prostoliniowy jest wzgldny |adne prawo fizyki nie odró|nia go
-

od stanu spoczynku. Zjawiska

zachodzce w ciele bdcym w ruchu jednostajnym pro
stoliniowym niczym si nie ró|ni od zjawisk zachodzcych w takim samym ciele w spo
czynku. Dotyczy to praw ujmujcych wszystkie zjawiska, nie tylko mechaniczne (ruchy).
Zasada wzgldno[ci G-E dotyczy praw fizyki, nie samego
a
opisu zjawisk.
Przyktad: ruch planet w polu grawitacyjnym SBoDca z potencjaBem 1/r. Ruch ten opi-
sujemy w UO zwizanym ze SBoDcem ir =0 to [rodek SBoDca. Dostajemy wtedy prawa
Keplera: ruch po elipsach. W ka|dym 1UO, w którym SBoDce ma staB prdko[ V # 0,
potencjaB jest zale|ny od czasu i nie jest sferycznie symetryczny > rozwizanie równan
Newtona (lub Hamiltona) jest trudne. W ukdadzie [rodka masy nie
dostajemy ruchu pla-
nety x = x(t), tylko równanie toru r = r(¢); w innych IUO trudno b dzie znalez nawet

równanie toru.
Prawa fizyki to równania ró|niczkowe (zwyczajne i czstkowe), a nie ich rozwizania.
Przyktady.
1) Równania Newtona, Lagrange'a i Hamiltona w mechanice kdasycznej -a nie,prawa"
Keplera.
2) Równanie Poissona dla potencjaBu grawitacyjnego V-U = 4nGp -a nie ,prawo" po-
wSzechnego ci|enia Newtona.

3) Równania Maxwella w elektrodynamice, w szczególno[ci równanie Poissona dlapo-

tencjaBu elektrostatycznego , Vp= -47p, -a nie ,prawo" Coulomba w elektrosta
tyce.
Zasada wzgledno[ci G-E ma [cislejsze sformuBowanie jako Zasada Niezmienniczo[ci
praw fizyki:

21
. S
S.

n
 czylir= f(t,r,V) - liniowa funkcja wielko[ci wS. Je|eli b =0 wt=0 osie obu ukBadów
pokrywaj si.
Wielko[ci fizyczne w fizyce nierelatywistycznej definiujemy w przestrzeni - a nie
w czasoprzestrzeni czyli w danym IUO jako 3-skalary i 3-wektory wzgldem zmiany
wspóBrzednych w tym IUO. Z zaBo|enia rozpatrujemy tylko wspóBrzdne kartezjaDskie
xtransformacja wspóBrzdnych w danym IUO jest liniowa:

=ax+ b.
Przytej transformacji wielko[ci skalarne nie zmieniaj si: s(t, x*) = s'(t,x"), a skBadowe
wektorów w' transformuj si liniowo jednorodnie:

w"(.)=aw"(t.r()
Transformacja Galileusza to transformacjawczasoprzestrzeni » 3-skalary i3-wektory
transformuj si rozmaicie przestaj by skalarami i wektorami w czasoprzestrzeni.

2.2.1. PrzykBady praw transformacyjnych

r(t)-wektorwodzcy czstki w IUO S.

1) Pr dko[ cz stki. WS: v(t) = i(). W S':

V =v-v
-
vddr
to nie jest prawo transformacyjne wektora w E°.

2) Przyspieszenie:
dv dr a'= dddT -V) =a
d2dr2 1t

- przyspieszenie nie zmienia si przy transformacji IUO.

3) Moment pdu:

J=rxp J=J+Vx(mr-tp). (zadanie)

4) Pole elektrostatyczne Coulomba:

E T12
-r),
mamy
- = - » E=s-r)=E
-

pole elektrostatyczne nie zmienia si.

23
N

Lo
Ba
P

J
 Definicja 5. Energia potencjalna jest skalarem wzgldem transformacji wspóBrzd-
nych w obrbie jednego 1U0.

Transformacja U przy zmianie IUO zale|y od modelu oddziaBywaD. Najprostszy mo-

del:
ukBad n czstek punktowych: masy m; i promienie wodzce r;(0), i = 1,2,... n. Od-
dziaBywanie czstki i z czstk j zale|y tylko od wektora ri - rj i ma energie poten-
cjaln Uiri -rj). CaBkowita energia potencjalna ukBaduwS:

U-U-r)
=1j=1
i<j
Postulat empiryczny dla takiej energii potencjalnej: energia Uij nie zmienia si (jest
skalarem) przy transformacji Galileusza. WS':

u,=ui-r/)=Uu-)
-

energia nie zmienia warto[ci i jest form-inwariantna: zale|y tak samo odr, ir, jak
od r; irj.

2.2.2. PrzykBady praw niezmienniczych wzgl dem transformacji Galileusza

1) Równania dynamiki Newtona dla czstki swobodnej

d'r
dr20.
Zbiór rozwizaD: ruchy jednostajne prostoliniowe
r(t) =vt+ ro, V,ro = const.
(1)
Po transformacji Galileusza z S do S' ten zbiór przechodzi w zbiór

r(t)=vt+r V=v-V, r=ro-b, (2)

to te| s ruchy jednostajne prostoliniowe. t=t> zbiory (1) i (2) s identyczne.
WS' czstka ma równania

0m d'r
dr
0 ma2= md?"dr2
-

form-inwariantno[: równania w zmiennych t,rit',r' maj t sam posta.

25
 9
LTes _upyely>ísefngeyzppo yeisezo u npepn eip az 01 ezoeuzo (zA1 +A:7)3
euMgI a{uzoajuoyaru"SMPguazojod.nsezo elbyunj eumad- f azp3
(E) )s+a*.a 1),7=7
eMeId snpam
às eJuauz 9sorem o3a[ ezsn»P foeuuoJSuen ÁzId az 'ppea (" *lu1)7
ueisuesej ázs{aru1o3ofeu kuazioIH ' a - i i zazId oxIá) {11 !1 qoAokzpoM M910113aM
po bzajez az . nsezo po bzarez au s M erueMÁFerzppo 3z "e{uazoez z kuu»fnu8Áza
euazoez Kuiqejso zeraL
7 0- 0 - I =7
Isal s M ue 3ueißej :peis
( a)n = (" )a
s ejuajuz aju eujelouayod eäsaua ("aa1) P +,L =I :uaez
S M osezo euz>iouy eåiaua - zAT= L
( )
Ga+A)3+
=
(A+a- )$)3+1=(A+a az+a3=2a+'A)=1
S M eUzoÁjoupy e8ioug
'a =
A+A= = +A+
S M pSoX1PLM zazid ÁuezeiÁm s onI M .psoy1®IM "P2ßueis
-P1 ueumoI .o_ouueuemui-uuoj ep auzoauoy a[uazoez aureuuu kuafnp{euz
euefouajod eys z euo1maN UeumoI qoámoioYaM u = eaauerßej erueumo1 :leini
euwes eye 1safruefouajod eaua-(-'n= (1-)/n={ra|n
z Ku»m (-1)'n yemÁerzppo auebuajod aa
Jaua (0)}1 apbzpom auajuioid 'u*Z'1 =! "u Kseu qohmoqund yajsbzo u pepln
fauzoisepM 3o{ueyoauMeasueBeT erueumou (z
ung yÁuu) 101qz Áuu. M191qz uapala{nmoJoZMpo ezsnajeo eloeuiojsuen apiÁmz
AuouzoiímIsal au uapez ,S IS
Opepn yoOMp z = azio1qz uLÁues uíi M3[uezè;mzOI auu. M([) aziojqzM auezè;M
01 Oupal ezpemoadazad ezsnajeg efpeuojsuen (2)1 () M9Jojqz 95ouzÁJuap!
eMOxelhm 1sa[ efoennís (eini
 N
O
S
N
E
I
E
I
N
To prowadzi do sprzeczno[ci: lewa strona nie zmienia si, a Z =

dte
a prawazmieniasi, F=F-£Vx H.
To byB powa|ny problem
elektrodynamiki przed Einsteinem sdzono, |e elektrodyna-
mika jest sBuszna tylko w jednym IUO: ukBadzie
spoczynkowym eteru.
2.2.4. Komentarze

1) Zasada G-E nie stosuje si do

transformacji z IUO do nieinercjalnego UO.
N-ukBad nieinercjalny ze wspóBrzdnymi
dem IUO Swjego pBaszczyznie
kartezjaDskimi (x', y,z) wirujcy wzgl-
(x,y)
klad: N- wirujca Ziemia, S- ukBad
wokóB osi z z prdko[ci ktow w(t). Na przy-
staBe"
inercjalny wyznaczony przez dalekie »gwiazdyy
Postulat: transformacja S- N ma posta
x=xcosd(t) +y sino()
y=-xsin¢(t))+ycosp()D)=o(dt»o = do
t=t. dt

0) = 0 dla t = 0 osie obu ukBadów

pokrywaj si. To nie jest transformacja Gali-
leusza-bo zale|y nieliniowo oddt.
WS mamy czstk
swobodn zr() (x,y,2), speBnia ma =0.
=

WNwyliczamy równanie, jakie speBnia wektor tej czstki r'(t) (x,y,z). =

Obliczamny:
d cos o- xw sin)+ýsind+ yw coso =icos)+ ýsind + oy,
dy -*sino+ ýcos)-wx, d =0,
drugie pochodne:
d y+ 2w +*, -ox -2wi +wy, drz =0.
= (0,0,w) prdko[
-

ktowa wirowania Nwzgldem S. Wielko[

pomoc iloczynów wektorowych: dt zapisuj za

rxo= (*y',-ôx',0),
x oxr)= -(x,y,0).
Pxw=(wy,-wt,0),
Wwirujcym N czstka swobodna speBnia równania

dr dw
dr
mr
ma2 dt
+2mx - mw x (wxr).|

siBa bezwBadno[ci sita Coriolisa siBa od[rodkowa

Wskutek nie-
jednostajno[ci obrotu

Tutaj wszystkie wielko[ci s wyra|one (mierzone) w N.

--pozorna prdko[ wirowania S wzgldem N mierzona w N.

29
 dziaBa siBa F, to trzeba j odpowiednio przetransformowa w E
wN. Obecno[czstk
w S na
Je|eli
trzech siB bezwBadno[ci w N> równania Newtona w NiS s ró|ne

2) Niezmienniczo[ci równaD fizyki wzgldem zmian 1UO nie nale|y myli z transfor.
IUO.
macj wspóBrzdnych przestrzennych w jednym
PrzykBad: równania Newtona dla czstki w polu centralnym (potencjaB U(r)) przed.
stawiony we wspóBrzdnych kartezjaDskich
ma-arczyli m - r ' =(x,y.z).
Transformacja do wspóBrzdnych sferycznych (7,0.p): wyra|amy skBadowe kartezjaD-
skie tych równaD za pomoc wielko[ci przetransformowanych, czyli w tych równa-
niach wyra|amy x oraz x' za pomoc r,0,0, i,6,6 oraz Y,8,6, np. x = rsin8 cos),
i = tsin@ cosp + rê cos6 cos- rÙsin@ sind itd., a nastpnie z tych 3 równaD wy
liczamy , ð i ð. Szybciej wylicza si to metod rachunku tensorowego za pomoc
pochodnej absolutnej. W wyniku dostajemy równania Newtona z potencjaBem cen-
tralnym UN we wspóBrzdnych (r,6,0):
mf-r0-roê sin?0)= dU
m0+~rô- sin0cos0) d
= 0,
r

mld 20%ctg0)=0.
Równania te maj zupetnie inn posta ni| we wspóBrzdnych (x, y. z)

2.3. Ograniczenia na stosowanie zasady wzgldno[ci

Zasade wzgldno[ci Galileusza-Einsteina stosuje si bezpo[rednio do praw funda-
mentalnych - one w swej tre[ci nie wyró|niaj |adnego IUO.

S zjawiska makroskopowe, które wyró|niaj pewien IUO do nich zasada wzgled-

no[ci stosuje si po[rednio.
Przyktady:
1) Fala elektromagnetyczna w pró|ni - nie ma no[nika materialnego |aden IUO
nie jest wyró|niony zasada
wzgldno[ci obowizuje jawnie niezmiennicze jest
równanie falowe

(1 0 2 02

u -

ka|da skBadowa pól E i H. Niezmienniczo[ jest wzgldem transformacji Loren-

tza! Jak zobaczymy dalej, transformacj Lorentza mo|na zmieni:
czstotliwo[ fali (fala radiowa-kwant y),
-

nat|enie pól E i H fali pBaskiej.

30
2) Dzwik w nieruchomym o[rodku (powietrze, woda). O[rodek jest nieruchomy» ist-
nieje IUO, w którym ten o[rodek spoczywa - jest to ukBad spoczynkowy (ukBad wBa-
sny) tej materii. O[rodek jest jednorodny i izotropowy wjego ukBadzie
wym dzwik rozchodzi si izotropowo ze staB
spoczynko-
prdko[ci vs.
u(t,x, y, z)- amplituda fali akustycznej, speBnia równanie falowe

2
8rx?oy? u=0 -
w spoczynkowym IUO o[rodka.
S' ma prdko[ Vwzgldem ukBadu wBasnego fala S'
Niech w ukBadzie wBasnym S fala
» w ma prdko[ v, Vs-V.
=

wychodzi z r = 0 mamy fal kulist (czoBo fali

to sfera) z
prdko[ci v, =
vsf. WS' mamy fal anizotropow (czoBo nie jest sfera)
z prdko[ci v, zale|n od
kta midzy v, i V.
To równanie falowe nie
jest niezmiennicze ani wzgldem transformacji Galileusza,
ani wzgldem transformacji Lorentza =» dla
dtwiku zasada wzgledno[ci nie stosuje
si bezpo[rednio.
3) Hydrodynamika i termodynamika o[rodka nieruchomego.
Wiekszo[ wielko[ci hydrodynamicznych i termodynamicznych daje si sensownie
zdefiniowa (i zmierzyé) tylko w ukBadzie
spoczynkowym.
Ci[nienie siBa statyczna prostopadBa do danej powierzchni
-

nym UO spoczynkowym.
-

ma sens tylko w lokal-

Temperatura wyra|a si przez [redni prdko[ molekuB (v) w stanie równowagi ter-
modynamicznej » w ukBadzie ruchomym (v') jest zaburzona przez V. Nie istnieje
uniwersalne prawo transformacyjne dla T- zale|y to od
sytuacji fizycznej.
Postulat:
termodynamik formuBujemy tylko w ukBadzie wBasnym ciaBa makroskopowego. Od-
rzucamy idealizacj prowadzc do ciaBa doskonale
sztywnego i stosujemy opis hydro-
dynamiczny.
PrzykBad: górski potok.
Phync ciecz dzielimy na makroskopowe krople. Ka|d kropl traktujemy jak jedno-
rodny ukBad termodynamiczny majcy dobrze okre[lone wszystkie wielko[ci
namicznei mechaniczne. Wprowadzamy dowolnie termody-
wybrany IUO LAB, w którym opi-
sujemy ruch cieczy. W LAB ka|da kropla ma pewn prdko[ v, tak |e wszystkie
ple potoku wyznaczaj gBadkie pole prdko[ci v{t,x). Prdko[ ka|dej kro
w czasie w skutek
kropli zmienia si
oddziaBywaD (ci[nienie) z kroplami j otaczajcymi.
Dla ka|dej kropli wprowadzamy jej
chwilowy ukBad wBasny jest to IUO, który ma

31
 prdko[ci tej kropli. tym ukBadzie definitt.
W
wzgledem LAB prdko[ róWn chwilowej kropli: gesto[ masy p, Ba
mechaniczne i
termodynamiczne
jemy wszystkie parametry temperatur T itd. Te wiel.
gesto[ energii wewn trznej ientropii,
dunek elektryczny IUO. W ukBadzie, w którym kropla sie
e,
zmiany
ko[ci traktujemy jak skalary wzgldem tego sensu fizycznego, jaki maja
porusza
-

np. w LAB skalary te na ogóB nie maj

w ukBadzie wBasnym.
Wniosek:
i implicite.
Zasad wzgldno[ci stosuje si explicite
czstek elementarnych.
Explicite: elektrodynamika w pró|ni, fizyka
o[rodka rozcigBego. Tu zasada wzgldno[ci
Implicite: termodynamika i hydrodynamika
obowizuje na gBbszym poziomie:

ukBadem spoczynkowym rozcigBego makroskopowego

ka|dy
ciaBa
IUO mo|e by
i w ka|dym ukBadzie spoczynkowym prawa termodynamiki i hydrodynamiki|
takie same -

w fotosferze SBoDca i w fotosferze dalekiej gwiazdy majcej

s
SBoDca dowolnie du| prdko[.
wzgledem

Zasada wzgldno[ci:
Galileusz - mechanika,
Einstein wszystkie procesy fundamentalne (elektrodynamika klasyczna i kwantowa,
Model Standardowy Czstek Elementarnych).
3. Podstawy teorii wzgldno[ci
3.1. Grupy przeksztaBceD i niezmienniki
Zasada wzgledno[ci fundamentalne prawa fizyki musz by takie, by byBy nie-
zmiennicze przy zmianie IUO.
Zasada wzgldno[ci nie wyznacza transformacji midzy 1UO. Nie istnieje ,zdrowo-
rozs dkowa" transformacja mi dzy IUO - bB d fizyków przed Einsteinem.
Geometrycznie: zmiana IUO to transformacja wspóBrzdnych (,transformacja bier-
na') w czasoprzestrzeni. Jej odwrotno[ci jest,transformacja czynna" - odwzorowanie
czasoprzestrzeni na siebie.
Do rozró|niania pomi dzy ró|nymi geometriami i okre[lenia, jakie wBasno[ci maj
sens geometryczny, a jakie s zwi zane z danym ukBadem wspóBrz dnych, sBu|y pro-
gram erlangeDski Felixa Kleina (1872).
Mamy przestrzeD (zbiór punktów) i w niej zbiór obiektów (figury, bryly) zbudowanych
z punktów oraz grup przeksztaBceD (odwzorowaD) tej przestrzeni na siebie.

Definicja 6.
Geometria przestrzeni to teoria wtasnosci niezmienniczych bryB i figur okreslonei grupy
przeksztatceD tej przestrzeni. Cayli:
Wlasno[ci geometryczne to te wBasno[ci uktadów punktów (figur, bry), które nie zmie-
niaj si przy dowolnych przeksztatceniach danej grupy-s to niezmienniki tej grupy.
Ró|nych geometrii jest du|o. Dwie geometrie kluczowe dla STW.

1) Geometria metryczna.
PrzestrzeD metryczna: istnieje w
niej metryka p{p, q) odlegBo[ punktów piq.
-

Odwzorowanie f: p-f{p) ,transformacja czynna'".

-

Odwzorowanie f jest izometri. je|eli

p{f{p), f{4)) =p{p, g) dla ka|dej pary piq.
Odwzorowania izometryczne tworz grup wzgldem skBadania: je|eli fig s izo-
metriami, to izometri jest te| g of, czyli dla ka|dego p: (g f]\p) :=
8{f{p).
Grupa izometrii danej przestrzeni okre[la jej geometri metryczn: wBasno[ciami
geometrycznymi s niezmienniki metryczne- odlegBo[ci » kty, pola powierzchni,
objeto[ci.
2) Geometria afiniczna.
Mamy n-wymiarow przestrzeD afiniczn, któr mo|na uto|sami z afiniczn R".
f jest odwzorowaniem afinicznym w R", je|eli punktowi p,
afiniczne x', i 1,., n, przyporzdkowuje
=
który ma wspóBrzdne
punkt f(p) o wspóBrzdnych
' =A',x +a,
A= (A;) e GL(n, R), detA #0, a' eR.

33
O
E
 OS Øct to linia [wiata pocztku 0'uktadu wspóBrzdnych przestrzennych.
Ten sam proces przedstawiam na diagramie Minkowskiego w S i na ten diagram na-
nosz uktad S'.

ctt ct
O

tCT
V>0

tA

S' ma prdko[ V> 0 wzgldem S o[ øcr (linia [wiata pocztku O) jest na

od osi øct dla t> 0. prawo
SygnaB [wietlny z Abiegnie pod ktem 45° od osi dcti øx (bo mav= c).
O[Dx miejsce geometryczne punktów zt'=0- prosta
=

WedBug obserwatora w S: lustro wB ucieka z prdko[ci Vprzechodzca przez oiB.

przed sygnaBem, a odbiornik
wC biegnie
mu
na spotkanie tg -tA> tc-tB.
Punkty C i A le| symetrycznie wzgldem punktu ø na diagramie
le| symetrycznie wzgldem o na diagramie w S> odcinki Aß iøC Minkowskiego w S'
sci obu maj równe dBugo-
na
diagramach > tc =-tA.
Std nierówno[ tg- tA> tc-tg daje tg - ta> -tA- ts 2 t >0.
tB>0-o[ Øx le|y ponad dodatni osi dx.
Osie dct' i øx ukBadu S'
tworz kt ostry na diagramie Minkowskiego = skutek
stawienia geometrii Minkowskiego na przed-
pBaszczyznie euklidesowej: transformacja
S' to nie jest obrót na pBaszczyznie, lecz nachylenie obu osi do siebie. z S do

Je[li V <0-S porusza si w

uktadu S tworz kt rozwarty.
lewo wzgldem S= osie S' na diagramie Minkowskiego

37
 ct ct

f tc

x
B

A A

V <0

Tutaj korzystamy tylko z tego, |e sygnaB [wietlny ma v =

cW obu ukBadach
linia [wiata jest pod jego
ktem 45° do osi czasu tego IUO,
którego osie rysujemy jako prosto-
padte.

Diagram Minkowskiego jest narysowany w ukBadzie S =>

[lone na osiach øct i
dx. Jednostki dBugo[ci na osiach
jednostki dBugo[ci s okre-
øctiøx diagramie nie
zrobimy to pózniej, jak wyznaczymy metryk tym
na
s jeszcze okre[lone -

odlegto[ci) M2. Teraz te

w
jednostki
nie (sposób mierzenia
s potrzebne.
Obserwator wS': zdarzenia d iB s równoczesne.
Obserwator w S: ø jest wcze[niejsze ni| w B gdy V> 0,
-

jest pózniejsze ni| wB - gdy V<0.

Jest to wzgldno[
równoczesno[ci zdarzeD w przypadku,
(w przestrzeni) 3-wektor jest równolegly do wektora gdy Bczcy je
prdko[ci wzgldnej
Wanalogiczny sposób mo|na dowie[
Twierdzenie 1. Dwa zdarzenia
równoczesne w jednym IUO sq równoczesne w
innym IUO, który porusza si ka~dym
wzgldem niego z prdko[ci wzgledn prostopadB
3-wektora tiqczcego te zdarzenia. do

Transformacja Lorentza daje prosty dowód tego twierdzenia.

38
3.4. InterwaB czasoprzestrzenny
wyka|emy, |e z postulatu c = const wynika fundamentalny niezmiennik w czaso-
przestrzeni: odlegBo[ dowolnych dwóch zdarzeD = czasoprzestrzeD jest metryczna.
Znaneprzestrzenie stanów w fizyce s niemetryczne:
-

przestrzeD stanów (p, V) w termodynamice,

-

przestrzeD fazowa ukBadu N punktów w mechanice klasycznej: punkt fazowy ma 6N

wspóBrzdnych 3 N poBo|eD q' i3N pdów pi, i =1,..,3N.
CzasoprzestrzeD Galileusza mechaniki klasycznej ma dwa niezmienniki transforma-
cji Galileusza:

1) odlegBo[ przestrzenn dwóch zdarzeD równoczesnych,

2) przedziaB czasu midzy dwoma dowolnymi zdarzeniami.
W czasoprzestrzeni Galileusza nie ma odlegBo[ci czasoprzestrzennej dwóch dowolnych
zdarzen.

Chcemy wprowadzi w czasoprzestrzeni Minkowskiego metryk, czyli odwzorowa-

nie przypisujce dowolnym dwu zdarzeniom ich odlegBo[. Z geometrii euklidesowej
jeste[my przyzwyczajeni do tego, |e odlegBo[ dwu ró|nych punktów jest dodatnia. Je-
|eli odlegBo[ w czasoprzestrzeni ma
uwzgldnia fakt, |e prdko[ [wiatBa jest taka sa-
ma we
wszystkich IUO i odlegBo[ danych dwu punktów ma mie we
wszystkich IUO
te sam warto[ (ma by niezmiennikiem, w
przeciwnym razie nie miaBaby wikszego
sensu), to nie dla ka|dej pary zdarzeD mo|e ona by dodatnia. Z tego wzgldu odlegBo[
czasoprzestrzenn poprawniej nazywamy interwaBem i konstruujemy jego kwadrat tak,
by speBniaB oba warunki.

Rozpatrujemy dwa zdarzenia, A iB, opisane w dwóch IUO:

S: A(t1,x1), B(t2,x2),
S': A(x), B(t%,x),

Definicja7.
Interwat czasoprzestrzenny As midzy A iB definiujemy wzorem dla jego kwadratu:
wS: (As) =c(t2-h)- (x2-X1)
wS:(As)
Znak
=c(t-{)-(-x).
minus- narzucony przez fizyk: aby As byB niezmiennikiem.
Rozpatrujemy dwa przypadki.

39
N
+
S
N
 O
N
T
 -O;MOs{ajun) yoÁmÁzny op auz»ÁIs ÁIoyaM 'ouEMOJoYs pquiopo - ÁIoyaM-b apisAzSM
:00heId M
s a au - »d påd-p íLmONIe3 eu zoajo eje AuoIMo»sla un
Auomoosfojun
101%eM - (*) ,d pd-p eu
(OnI uÁuep m) * aONund m ds eobfnpleuz ejdoiy odoy z àjs epepys zoa1p eobuljd
pepzid
wound _uupe[ z .uuÁuezb;mz aqu -.uÁuI
-poqoMs ureiolyam Áuua[nsdo auzIÁZy 13_oN1a;M YOÁuo;moos{opuun M910jyaM zo9Ido
wu M yoÁupåzyodsM po! OnI nioqÁm po au
-zaJezaju es =
q»ÁmKzIy qoÁUmad op auzoÁJs es :ÁuzÁINSUUOa8 suas è[eu Ároryam-7 aL
und Amojuifodsm Áu[OMop obyZM PUZOU g iseurez
s 8 = [p] npåd erp) EMOIeJULÁM gsOxjo;M -0#D ( * - =d
3zl 'gV EYuIopo yuniay e u y MÁuoIdazoez jd npòd 101yAM-b
-01d yoju op 1sa[ Kio1y
Áueuofoiod
'o8sueMo1apys eyupp0 yauniam èfeu . pfezns oxe[ a[ kuus|nsáy
y oßauzÁjaußeuonyep nefoua1od Áys "eguszsajdsÁz1d 'npåd 1osoxpåid AioyM-t
0 es :(uo) .o_oaNHp po auzoI KrejuÁm èfeN [UÁUO;MoOs[a[un .ureioiyaM ès zo] = eJu
-adazoez nyund - nxund o3oupaf op auemoypbziodkzid bs (eupåqzau jsal aqu [enm
louzoÁjsimKPja1 a»kiewauy o aezpzo1 mÁuafepod aforuyap å1! M [aMo1OYOM YZ
PUE M e[Yp] alåjs afnjuyaa) *G M YoÁmízIy op auz»ájs ÁIoYaM Oxe[ - qosods kuu/ m
s fnugop Kuemozays youppo ore[M9rund åred zozid aueMOJuyapzbs aIN
4pÁuzÁny osoyjom soíuzo1 ÁiovyoM 7l7
D h 'oßapysmoyuin byÁnou [ukuozoeuzÁm ,Jueny" 1kmosap1pnabyí
2 397EMjo any zaz1d euozoeuzÁm esßojodo1 Azpdjuod g_ouzajqzo1 afoyunst ' G M
00+ >Z'f'r'19>oo-auozo{uea8oajuèsS
j1eMZ bs
ou:,3m kays-E p$ousezm bfeuu apu hg M oJuyszioLMOdiodjs Kz1gaL
Amoaz)
Áupomsyazojs -1=*rATL =(Ød)s
EMOYOModnmp qnj
Oupol epjojoquadjs-T)
 ne), wektory swobodne zapisujemy jako 4 skBadowe w bazie wyznaczonej przez kon-
kretny ukBad wspóBrzdnych:
-

ustalamy pewien IUO,

w tym IUO wybieramy
-

pewien kartezjaDski ukBad wspóBrzdnych (x, y,z) -

jest wy-
znaczony z dokBadno[ci do translacji i obrotów.
W tak ustalonym ukBadzie wspóBrzednych x ka|dy 4-wektor u ma skBadowe

u=
(u") {",u',i,ë) {u",u).|
= =

u= (u, ,u) -3-wektor w przestrzeni E3, cz[ przestrzenna 4-wektora u.

4.2. Algebra wektorów i sto|ek [wietlny

Tensor metryczny Minkowskiego maz definicji t sam
posta (i warto[) we wszyst-
kich IUO ze wspóBrzdnymi kartezjaDskimi,

diagl+1,-1,-1,-1.
Ta metryka definiuje równie| iloczyn
skalarny wektorów.
Definicja 8.
lloczyn skalarny dwóch wektorów zaczepionych w tym samym punkcie Ma jest liczb
równq

u V= (ulv):= nuvuv' = uv'-u'v' -uv - w'V=u-u.v.

nuvvu>iloczyn jest symetryczny: u- V= V:u=7uv vu".

u v-
euklidesowy iloczyn skalarny 3-wektorów.
uv- skalar, liczba nie zmieniajca si przy zmianie skBadowych u#i v wskutek trans-
formacji midzy IUO.
Je[li x # y, to nie istnieje iloczyn skalarny wektorów
Je[li wektor
u(x) i v(y.
u -

swobodny, to istnieje iloczyn skalarny u v(x) z dowolnym wektorem

umiejscowionym v(x) ten iloczyn mo|e nie byfizycznie interesujacy.
-

Kwadrat dBugo[ci wektora

-u= (ulu) =nuv ut u' =

(u')-u|- mo|e by >0, <0 lub = 0.

Ortogonalno[ wektorów zaczepionych w tym samym

punkcie:
ulve u v= 7v uv =
u -u-v= 0.|
45
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 Monday, January 16th.—Thawing. A dull sky, with a strong south-
west wind. It is again impossible to see far, but no further shots are
heard since yesterday afternoon. Has the bombardment stopped? Or
does the wind prevent the sound from reaching us?
In the morning I read Trochu’s letter to Moltke, in which he
complains that our projectiles have struck the hospitals in the south
of Paris, although flags were hung out indicating their character. He
is of opinion that this cannot have been by accident, and calls
attention to the international treaties according to which such
institutions are to be held inviolable. Moltke strongly resented the
idea of its having been in any way intentional. The humane manner
in which we have conducted the war, “so far as the character which
was given to it by the French since the 4th of September permitted,”
secured us against any such suspicion. As soon as a clearer
atmosphere and greater proximity to Paris enabled us to recognise
the Geneva flag on the buildings in question it might be possible to
avoid even accidental injury. Treitschke writes requesting me to ask
the Chief if, in view of his deafness, he should allow himself to be
elected for the Reichstag. I lay the letter before the Minister, who
says: “He must know from experience how far his infirmity is a
hindrance. For my part, I should be extremely pleased if he were
elected. Write him to that effect. Only he should not speak too
much.”
Prince Pless and Maltzahn dine with us. We learn that the
proclamation to the German people is to be read the day after to-
morrow, at the festival of the Orders, which will be held in the
Gallerie des Glaces at the Palace. There, in the midst of a brilliant
assembly, the King will be proclaimed Emperor. Detachments of
troops with their flags, the generals, the Chancellor of the
Confederation, and a number of princely personages will attend. The
Chief has altered his mind as to letting Favre pass through our lines,
and has written him a letter which amounts to a refusal. “Favre,” he
said “with his demand to be allowed to attend the Conference in
London, reminds me of the way children play the game of Fox in the
Hole. They touch and then run off to a place where they cannot be
caught. But he must swallow the potion he has brewed. His honour
requires it, and, so I wrote him.” This change of view was due to
Favre’s circular of the 12th of January. Later on, the Chief said he
believed he was going to have an attack of gout. Altogether he was
not in good humour. While he was reckoning up the fortresses taken
by us, Holstein addressed a remark to him. The Chief looked straight
at him with his large grey eyes, and said in a dry cutting tone: “One
should not be interrupted when engaged in counting. I have now lost
count altogether. What you want to say might be said later.”

I here introduce a survey of this incident, with particulars of

documents which afterwards came to my knowledge.
Favre, as Minister for Foreign Affairs, was informed on the 17th
of November (in a despatch from Chaudordy, dated from Tours, on
the 11th of the month), that it had been reported from Vienna, that
the Russian Government no longer considered itself bound by the
stipulations of the Treaty of 1856. Favre replied immediately. While
recommending the strictest reserve, until the receipt of official
information, he said that no opportunity should be neglected of
emphasising the right of France, to take part in such international
deliberations as the Russian declaration might provoke. Negotiations
were then conducted, both verbally, and in writing, between the
various Powers and the French Provisional Government, in which
the French endeavoured to induce the representatives of those
Powers to admit the justice of their contention, that the
representatives of France “would be bound in duty to bring up at the
same time for discussion another matter of entirely different import.”
The Delegation at Tours, while giving expression to these views, was
of opinion that any invitation given by Europe should be accepted,
even, should no promise be obtained beforehand, nor even an
armistice. On the 31st of December, Gambetta wrote to Favre: “You
must be prepared to leave Paris, to attend the London Conference if,
as is stated, England has succeeded in obtaining a passport.” Before
this communication arrived, Favre had announced to Chaudordy that
the Government had decided that France, “if called upon in regular
form,” would send a representative to the London Conference,
provided its Parisian representatives, who were verbally invited by
England, were supplied with the necessary passport. To this the
English Cabinet agreed, and Chaudordy informed Favre in a
despatch which arrived in Paris on the 8th of January, and also
contained the announcement, that he, Favre, had been appointed by
the Government to represent France at the Conference. This
communication was confirmed in a letter from Lord Granville to
Favre, dated the 29th of December, and received in Paris, on the
10th of January, which ran as follows:
“M. de Chaudordy has informed Lord Lyons that your Excellency
has been proposed as the representative of France at the
Conference. He has at the same time requested that I should
procure a passport permitting your Excellency to go through the
Prussian lines. I immediately requested Count Bernstorff to ask for
such a passport, and to send it to you by a German officer with a flag
of truce. I was informed yesterday by Count Bernstorff that a
passport will be at your Excellency’s disposal on its being demanded
at the German headquarters by an officer despatched from Paris for
the purpose. He added that it cannot be delivered by a German
officer, so long as satisfaction is not given to the officer who was fired
at while acting as the bearer of a flag of truce. I am informed by M.
Tissot, that much time would be lost before this communication could
be forwarded to you by the delegation at Bordeaux, and I have
accordingly proposed to Count Bernstorff another way in which it
may be transmitted to you. Requesting your Excellency to permit me
to take this opportunity of expressing my satisfaction at entering into
personal communication with you, &c.”
Favre regarded the last sentence in this letter as a recognition of
the present French Government, and an invitation that he might take
advantage of to address the Powers in London on French affairs. In
the circular of the 12th of January which he addressed to the French
Ministers, he says:—
“The Government, directly invited in this despatch, cannot,
without surrendering the rights of France, refuse the invitation thus
conveyed to her. It may certainly be objected that the time for a
discussion concerning the neutralisation of the Black Sea has not
been happily chosen. But the very fact that the European Powers
should thus have entered into relations with the French Republic at
the present decisive moment when France is fighting single-handled
for her honour and existence, lends it an exceptional significance. It
is the commencement of a tardy exercise of justice, an obligation
which cannot again be renounced. It endues the change of
Government with the authority of international law, and leaves a
nation which is free notwithstanding its wounds to appear in an
independent position upon the stage of the world’s history, face to
face with the ruler who led it to its ruin, and the Pretenders who
desire to reduce it into subjection to themselves. Furthermore, who
does not feel that France, admitted to a place amongst the
representatives of Europe, has an unquestionable right to raise her
voice in that council? Who can prevent her, supported by the eternal
laws of justice, from defending the principles that secure her
independence and dignity? She will surrender none of those
principles. Our programme remains unaltered, and Europe, who has
invited the man who promulgated that programme, knows very well
that it is his determination and duty to maintain it. There should,
therefore, be no hesitation, and the Government would have
committed a grave error if it had declined the overtures made to it.
“While recognising that fact, however, the Government consider,
as I do, that the Minister for Foreign Affairs should not leave Paris
during the bombardment of the city by the enemy, unless greater
interests were at stake.” (Then follows a long sentimental
lamentation as to the damage caused by the “rage of the aggressor”
in throwing bombs into churches, hospitals, nurseries, &c., with the
intention of “spreading terror.” The document then proceeds): “Our
brave Parisian population feels its courage rise as the danger
increases. Thus exasperated and indignant, but animated by a firm
resolve, it will not yield. The people are more determined than ever
to fight and conquer, and we also. I cannot think of separating myself
from them during this crisis. Perhaps it will soon be brought to a
close by the protests addressed to Europe and to the members of
the Corps Diplomatique present in Paris. England will understand
that until then my place is in the midst of my fellow citizens.”
Favre made the same declaration, or rather the first half of it, two
days before in the reply sent to Granville’s despatch, in which he
says: “I cannot assume the right to leave my fellow citizens at a
moment when they are subjected to such acts of violence” (against
“an unarmed population,” as—in the line immediately preceding—he
describes a strong fortress with a garrison of about 200,000 soldiers
and militia). He then continues: “Communications between Paris and
London, thanks to those in command of the besieging forces” (what
naïveté!) “are so slow and uncertain that with the best will I cannot
act in accordance with the terms of the invitation contained in your
despatch. You have given me to understand that the Conference will
meet on the 3rd of February, and will then probably adjourn for a
week. Having received this information on the evening of the 10th of
January, I should not be able to avail myself in time of your invitation.
Besides, M. de Bismarck, in forwarding the despatch, did not
enclose the passport, which, nevertheless, is absolutely essential.
He demands that a French officer shall proceed to the German
headquarters to receive it, on the plea of a complaint addressed to
the Governor of Paris with regard to the treatment of the bearer of a
flag of truce, an incident which occurred on the 23rd of December.
M. de Bismarck adds that the Prussian Commander-in-Chief has
forbidden all communication under flags of truce until satisfaction is
given for the incident in question. I do not inquire whether such a
decision, contrary to the laws of war, is not an absolute denial of a
higher right, always hitherto maintained in the conduct of hostilities,
which recognises the exigencies of a situation and the claims of
humane feeling. I confine myself to informing your Excellency that
the Governor of Paris hastened to order an inquiry into the incident
referred to by M. de Bismarck, and that this inquiry brought to his
knowledge much more numerous instances of similar conduct on the
part of Prussian sentries which had never been made a pretext for
interrupting the usual exchange of communications. M. de Bismarck
appears to have acknowledged the accuracy of these remarks, at
least in part, as he has to-day commissioned the United States
Minister to inform me that, with the reservation of inquiries on both
sides, he to-day re-establishes communications under flags of truce.
There is, therefore, no necessity for a French officer to go to the
Prussian headquarters. I will put myself in communication with the
Minister of the United States for the purpose of receiving the
passport which you have obtained for me. As soon as it reaches my
hands, and the situation in Paris permits me, I shall proceed to
London, confident that I shall not appeal in vain in the name of my
Government to the principles of justice and morality, in securing due
regard for which Europe has such a great interest.”
So far M. Favre. The condition of Paris had not altered, the
protests addressed to Europe had not put an end to the crisis, nor
could they have done so, when Favre, on January 13th, that is, three
days after the letter to Granville, and on the day of the issue of his
circular to the representatives of France abroad, sent the following
despatch to the Chancellor of the Confederation:—
“M. le Comte,—Lord Granville informs me in his despatch of
December 29th, which I received on the evening of January 10th,
that your Excellency, at the request of the English Cabinet, holds a
passport at my disposal which is necessary to enable the French
Plenipotentiary to the London Conference to pass through the
Prussian lines. As I have been appointed to that office, I have the
honour to request your Excellency to give instructions to have this
passport, made out in my name, sent to me as speedily as possible.”
I reproduce all these solely with the object of illustrating the great
difference between the character and capacity of Favre and of
Bismarck. Compare the foregoing documents with those which the
Chancellor drafted. In the former, indecision, equivocation,
affectation, and fine phrases, ending in the very opposite of what had
been emphatically laid down a few lines or a few days previously. In
the latter, on the contrary, decision, simplicity, and a natural and
purely business-like manner. On January 16th the Chancellor replied
to Favre as follows (omitting the introductory phrases):—
“Your Excellency understands that, at the suggestion of the
Government of Great Britain, I hold a passport at your disposal for
the purpose of enabling you to take part in the London Conference.
That supposition is, however, not correct. I could not enter into
official negotiations, which would be based on the presupposition
that the Government of National Defence is, according to
international law, in a position to act in the name of France, so long
at least as it has not been recognised by the French nation itself.
“I presume that the officer in command of our outposts would
have granted your Excellency permission to pass through the
German lines if your Excellency had applied for the same at the
headquarters of the besieging forces. The latter would have had no
reason to take your Excellency’s political position and the object of
your journey into consideration, and the authorisation granted by the
military authorities to pass through our lines, which, from their
standpoint, they need not have hesitated to grant, would have left
the Ambassador of his Majesty the King in London a free hand to
deal without prejudice with the question whether, according to
international law, your Excellency’s declarations could be accepted
as the declarations of France. Your Excellency has rendered the
adoption of such a course impossible by officially communicating to
me the object of your journey, and the official request for a passport
for the purpose of representing France at the Conference. The
above-mentioned political considerations, in support of which I must
adduce the declaration which your Excellency has published, forbid
me to accede to your request for such a document.
“In addressing this communication to you, I must leave it to
yourself and your Government to consider whether it is possible to
find another way in which the scruples above mentioned may be
overcome, and all prejudice arising from your presence in London
may be avoided.
“But even if some such way should be discovered, I take the
liberty to question whether it is advisable for your Excellency at the
present moment to leave Paris and your post as a member of the
Government there, in order to take part in a Conference on the
question of the Black Sea, at a time when interests of much greater
importance to France and Germany than Article XI. of the Treaty of
1856 are at stake in Paris. Your Excellency would also leave behind
you in Paris the agents of neutral States and the members of their
staffs who have remained there, or rather been kept there,
notwithstanding the fact that they have long since obtained
permission to pass through the German lines, and are therefore the
more specially committed to the protection and care of your
Excellency as the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the de facto
Government.
“I can hardly believe that in a critical situation, to the creation of
which you have so largely contributed, your Excellency will deprive
yourself of the possibility of co-operating towards that solution, for
which you are equally responsible.”

I now let the diary resume its narrative.

Tuesday, January 17th.—We were joined at dinner by the Saxon,
Count Nostitz-Wallwitz, who, it is understood, is to take up an
administrative appointment here, and a Herr Winter, or von Winter,
who is to be Prefect at Chartres. On some one referring to the future
military operations, the Chief observed: “I think that when, with God’s
help, we have taken Paris, we shall not occupy it with our troops.
That work may be left to the National Guard in the city. Also a French
commandant. We shall occupy merely the forts and walls. Everybody
will be permitted to enter, but nobody to leave. It will, therefore, be a
great prison until they consent to make peace.”
The Minister then spoke to Nostitz about the French Conseils
Généraux, and said we should try to come to an understanding with
them. They would form a good field here for further political
operations. “So far as the military side of the affair is concerned,” he
continued, “I am in favour of greater concentration. We should not go
beyond a certain line, but deal with that portion thoroughly, making
the administration effectual, and in particular collect the taxes. The
military authorities are always for advancing. They have a centrifugal
plan of operations and I a centripetal. It is a question whether we
ought to hold Orleans, and even whether it would not be better to
retire also from Rouen and Amiens. In the south-east—I do not know
why—they want to go as far as Dijon. And if we cannot supply
garrisons for every place within our sphere of occupation, we should
from time to time send a flying column wherever they show
themselves recalcitrant, and shoot, hang and burn. When that has
been done a couple of times they will learn sense.” Winter was of
opinion that the mere appearance of a detachment of troops
entrusted with the task of restoring order, would be sufficient in such
districts. The Chief: “I am not so sure. A little hanging would certainly
have a better effect, and a few shells thrown in and a couple of
houses burned down. That reminds me of the Bavarian who said to a
Prussian officer of artillery: ‘What do you think, comrade; shall we set
that little village on fire, or only knock it about a little?’ but they
decided after all to set it on fire.”
I do not now remember how it was that the Chief came to speak
again of his letter he wrote yesterday to Favre. “I have given him
clearly to understand that it would not do, and that I could not believe
that he who had taken part in the affair of the 4th of September
would fail to await the issue. I wrote the letter in French, first
because I do not regard the correspondence as official but rather as
private, and then in order that every one may be able to read it in the
French lines until it reaches him.” Nostitz asked how diplomatic
correspondence in general was now conducted. The Chief: “In
German. Formerly it was in French. But I have introduced German—
only, however, with Cabinets whose language is understood in our
own Foreign Office. England, Italy and also Spain—even Spanish
can be read in case of need. Not with Russia, as I am the only one in
the Foreign Office who understands Russian. Also not with Holland,
Denmark and Sweden—people do not learn those languages as a
rule. They write in French and we reply in the same language.” “At
Ferrières I spoke to Thiers” (he meant Favre) “in French. But I told
him that was only because I was not treating with him officially. He
laughed, whereupon I said to him: ‘You will see that we shall talk
plain German to you in the negotiations for peace.’”
At tea we hear from Holstein that the bombardment on the south
side has been stopped, Blumenthal, who was always against it,
having got his way. It is hoped, however, that the Crown Prince of
Saxony will proceed vigorously with the bombardment on the north
side. One would like to tell this to our own Crown Prince, and to ask
him what would be said when it was known that the Saxons had
forced Paris to capitulate? “Unless you are quite certain of that,” said
Wagener, “and have it on absolutely trustworthy authority, do not let
the Chief hear of it. I should not like to guarantee that in that case he
would not be off to-morrow. He is a volcano whose action is
incalculable, and he does not stand jokes in such matters.” Holstein,
however, appears to have been misinformed. At least Count
Dönhoff, who came in afterwards, declared that our siege guns in the
south were also at work, but that owing to the south-west wind we
did not hear the firing, and, moreover, it was not so heavy as during
the preceding days. Fire would probably be opened to-morrow from
St. Denis upon the city, a pleasant surprise for the inhabitants of the
northern quarters.
Wednesday, January 18th.—In the morning read despatches and
newspapers. Wollmann tells me that an order has been issued
promoting our Chief to the rank of Lieutenant-General. When
Wollmann took the order up to him and congratulated him, the
Chancellor threw it angrily on the bed and said: “What is the good of
that to me?” (“Wat ik mich davor koofe?”—low German dialect.)
Doubtless imagination, but it appears to be correct that the Minister
is to-day in very bad humour and exceptionally irritable.
The festival of the Orders and the Proclamation of the German
Empire and Emperor took place in the great hall of the palace
between 12 and 1.30 p.m. It was held with much military pomp and
ceremony, and is said to have been a very magnificent and imposing
spectacle. In the meantime I took a long walk with Wollmann.
The Chief did not dine with us, as he was bidden to the
Emperor’s table. On his return I was called to him twice to receive
instructions. His voice was an unusually weak voice, and looked very
tired and worn out.
The Chief has received a communication from a number of
diplomats who have remained behind in Paris. Kern, the Swiss
Minister, who is their spokesman, requests the Chancellor to use his
influence in order to obtain permission for the persons committed to
their protection to leave the city. At the same time our right to
bombard Paris is questioned, and it is insinuated that we
intentionally fire at buildings that ought to be respected. The reply is
to point out that we have already repeatedly, through their diplomatic
representatives, called the attention of the citizens of neutral states
living in Paris to the consequences of the city’s prolonged resistance.
This was done as early as the end of September, and again several
times in October. Furthermore, we have for months past allowed
every citizen of a neutral State, who was able to give evidence of his
nationality, to pass through our lines without any difficulty. At the
present time, for military reasons, we can only extend that
permission to members of the Corps Diplomatique. It is not our fault
if subjects of neutral states have not hitherto availed themselves of
the permission to seek a place of safety for their persons and their
property. Either they have not wished to leave, or they have not been
allowed to do so by those who at present hold power in Paris. We
are fully justified by international law in bombarding Paris, as it is a
fortress, the principal fortress of France—an entrenched camp which
serves the enemy as a base of offensive and defensive action
against our armies. Our generals cannot, therefore, be expected to
refrain from attacking it, or to handle it with velvet gloves.
Furthermore, the object of the bombardment is not to destroy the
city, but to capture the fortress. If our fire renders residence in Paris
uncomfortable and dangerous, those who recognise that fact ought
not to have gone to live in a fortified town, or should not have
remained there. They may, therefore, address their complaints not to
us, but to those who transformed Paris into a fortress, and who now
use its fortifications as an instrument of war against us. Finally, our
artillery does not intentionally fire at private houses and benevolent
institutions, such as hospitals, &c. That should be understood as a
matter of course from the care with which we have observed the
provisions of the Geneva Convention. Such accidents as do occur
are due to the great distance at which we are firing. It cannot,
however, be tolerated that Paris, which has been and still is the chief
centre of military resistance, should bring forward these cases as an
argument for forbidding the vigorous bombardment which is intended
to render the city untenable. Wrote articles to the above effect.
Thursday, January 19th.—Dull weather. The post has not been
delivered, and it is ascertained on inquiry that the railway line has
been destroyed at a place called Vitry la Ville, near Châlons. From
10 a.m. we hear a rather vigorous cannonade, in which field guns
ultimately join. I write two articles on the sentimental report of the
Journal des Débats, according to which our shells only strike
ambulances, mothers with their daughters, and babies in swaddling
clothes. What evil-minded shells!
Keudell tells us at lunch that to-day’s cannonade was directed
against a great sortie with twenty-four battalions and numerous guns
in the direction of La Celle and Saint Cloud. In my room after lunch
Wollmann treats me to a number of anecdotes of doubtful
authenticity. According to him the Chief yesterday remarked to the
King, when his Majesty changed the Minister’s title to that of
Chancellor of the Empire, that this new title brought him into bad
company. To which the King replied that the bad company would be
transformed into good company on his joining it. (From whom can
Wollmann have heard that?) My gossip also informs me that the
King made a slip of the tongue yesterday at the palace, when in
announcing his assumption of the title of Emperor he added the
words “by the Grace of God.” This requires to be confirmed by some
more trustworthy authority. Another story of Wollmann’s seems more
probable, namely, that the Minister sends in a written request to the
King, almost every day, to be supplied with the reports of the
General Staff respecting the English coal ships sunk by our people
near Rouen. He used in the same way to telegraph day after day to
Eulenburg who has always been very dilatory: “What about Villiers?”
And before that in Berlin he had a request addressed to Eulenburg at
least once every week: Would he kindly have the draft of the district
regulations sent forward as early as possible?
Towards 2 o’clock, when the rattle of the mitrailleuse could be
clearly distinguished, and the French artillery was at the outside only
half a German mile in a straight line from Versailles, the Chief rode
out to the aqueduct at Marly, whither the King and the Crown Prince
were understood to have gone.
The affair must have caused some anxiety at Versailles in the
meantime, as we see that the Bavarian troops have been called out.
They are posted in large masses in the Place d’Armes and the
Avenue de Paris. The French are camped, sixty thousand strong it is
said, beneath Mont Valérien and in the fields to the east of it. They
are understood to have captured the Montretout redoubt, and the
village of Garches to the west of Saint Cloud, which is not much
more than three-quarters of an hour from here, is also in their hands.
They may, it is feared, advance further to-morrow and oblige us to
withdraw from Versailles, but this seems to be at least an
exaggeration. At dinner there is scarcely any talk of immediate
danger. Geheimrath von Löper, who is understood to be Under
Secretary in the Ministry of the Royal Household, dines with us. We
hear that there is no longer any danger for our communications in
the south-east, as Bourbaki, after pressing Werder very hard for
three days without however being able to defeat him, has given up
the attempt to relieve Belfort and is now in full retreat, probably
owing to the approach of Manteuffel. The Chief then refers to a
report that the taxes cannot be collected in various districts of the
occupied territory. He says it is difficult, indeed impossible, to
garrison every place where the population must be made to pay the
taxes. “Nor,” he adds, “is it necessary to do so? Flying columns of
infantry accompanied by a couple of guns are all that is needed.
Without even entering into the places, the people should be simply
told, ‘If you do not produce the taxes in arrear within two hours we
shall pitch some shells in amongst you.’ If they see that we are in
earnest they will pay. If not the place should be bombarded, and that
would help in other cases. They must learn what war means.”
The conversation afterwards turned on the grants that were to be
expected after the conclusion of peace, and alluding to those made
in 1866, the Chief said, inter alia: “They should not be grants of
money. I at least was reluctant for a long time to accept one, but at
length I yielded to the temptation. Besides, it was worse still in my
case, as I received it not from the King but from the Diet. I did not
want to take any money from people with whom I had fought so
bitterly for years.
“Moreover, the King was to some extent in my debt, as I had sent
him forty pounds of fine fresh caviare—a present for which he made
me no return. It is true that perhaps he never received it. Probably
that fat rascal Borck intercepted it.” “These rewards ought to have
taken the form of grants of land, as in 1815; and there was a good
opportunity of doing so, particularly in the corner of Bavaria which we
acquired, and which consisted almost entirely of State property.”
While we were alone at tea, Bucher told me that “before the war
he had a good deal to do with the Spanish affair.” (This was not
exactly news to me, as I remembered that long before that he
suddenly ordered the Imparcial, and gave directions for various
articles directed against Montpensier.) He had negotiated in the
matter with the Hohenzollerns, father and son, and had also spoken
to the King on the affair in an audience of one hour’s duration which
he had had with him at Ems.
Friday, January 20th.—I am called to the Chief at 12 o’clock. He
wishes to have his reply to Kern’s communication, and the letter in
which he declined to supply Favre with a passport, published in the
Moniteur.
Bohlen again came to dinner, at which we were also joined by
Lauer and von Knobelsdorff. The Chief was very cheerful and
talkative. He related, amongst other things, that while he was at
Frankfurt he frequently received and accepted invitations from the
Grand Ducal Court at Darmstadt. They had excellent shooting there.
“But,” he added, “I have reason to believe that the Grand Duchess
Mathilde did not like me. She said to some one at that time: ‘He
always stands there and looks as important as if he were the Grand
Duke himself.’”
While we were smoking our cigars, the Crown Prince’s aide-de-
camp suddenly appeared, and reported that Count —— (I could not
catch the name) had come, ostensibly on behalf of, and under
instructions from, Trochu, to ask for a two days’ armistice in order to
remove the wounded and bury those who fell in yesterday’s
engagement. The Chief replied that the request should be refused. A
few hours would be sufficient for the removal of the wounded and the
burial of the dead; and, besides, the latter were just as well off lying
on the ground as they would be under it. The Major returned shortly
afterwards and announced that the King would come here; and,
hardly a quarter of an hour later, his Majesty arrived with the Crown
Prince. They went with the Chancellor into the drawing-room, where
a negative answer was prepared for Trochu’s messenger.
 About 9 p.m. Bucher sent me up a couple of lines in pencil to the
effect that the letter to Kern should be published in the Moniteur to-
morrow, but that the communication to Favre should be held over for
the present.
Saturday, January 21st.—At 9.30 a.m. the Moniteur is delivered,
and contains the Chief’s letter to Favre. Very disagreeable; but I
suppose my letter to Bamberg only arrived after the paper was
printed. At 10 o’clock I am called to the Minister, who says nothing
about this mishap, although he has the newspaper before him. He is
still in bed, and wishes the protest of the Comte de Chambord
against the bombardment cut out for the King. I then write an article
for the Kölnische Zeitung, and a paragraph for the local journal.
Voigts-Rhetz, Prince Putbus, and the Bavarian Count Berghem
were the Chancellor’s guests at dinner. The Bavarian brought the
pleasant news that the Versailles treaties were carried in the second
chamber at Munich by two votes over the necessary two-thirds
majority. The German Empire was, therefore, complete in every
respect. Thereupon the Chief invited the company to drink the health
of the King of Bavaria, “who, after all, has really helped us through to
a successful conclusion.” “I always thought that it would be carried,”
he added, “if only by one vote—but I had not hoped for two. The last
good news from the seat of war will doubtless have contributed to
the result.”
It was then mentioned that in the engagement the day before
yesterday the French brought a much larger force against us than
was thought at first, probably over 80,000 men. The Montretout
redoubt was actually in their hands for some hours, and also a
portion of Garches and Saint Cloud. The French had lost enormously
in storming the position—it was said 1,200 dead and 4,000
wounded. The Chancellor observed: “The capitulation must follow
soon. I imagine it may be even next week. After the capitulation we
shall supply them with provisions as a matter of course. But before
they deliver up 700,000 rifles and 4,000 guns they shall not get a
single mouthful of bread—and then no one shall be allowed to leave.
We shall occupy the forts and the walls and keep them on short
commons until they accommodate themselves to a peace
satisfactory to us. After all there are still many persons of intelligence
and consideration in Paris with whom it must be possible to come to
some arrangement.”
Then followed a learned discussion on the difference between
the titles “German Emperor” and “Emperor of Germany,” and that of
“Emperor of the Germans” was also mooted. After this had gone on
for a while the Chief, who had taken no part in it, asked: “Does any
one know the Latin word for sausage (Wurscht)?” Abeken answered
“Farcimentum,” and I said “Farcimen.” The Chief, smiling:
“Farcimentum or farcimen, it is all the same to me. Nescio quid mihi
magis farcimentum esset.” (“Es ist mir Wurst” is student’s slang, and
means “It is a matter of the utmost indifference to me.”)
Sunday, January 22nd.—In the forenoon I wrote two paragraphs
for the German newspapers, and one for the Moniteur, in connection
with which I was twice called to see the Chief.
Von Könneritz, a Saxon, General von Stosch, and Löper joined
us at dinner. There was nothing worth noting in the conversation
except that the Minister again insisted that it would be only fair to
invest the wounded with the Iron Cross. “The Coburger,” he went on,
“said to me the other day, ‘It would really be a satisfaction if the
soldiers also got the Cross now.’ I replied, ‘Yes, but it is less
satisfactory that we two should have received it.’”
Monday, January 23rd.—I telegraph that the bombardment on the
north side has made good progress, that the fort at Saint Denis has
been silenced, and that an outbreak of fire has been observed in
Saint Denis itself as well as in Paris. All our batteries are firing
vigorously, although one cannot hear them. So we are told by
Lieutenant von Uslar, of the Hussars, who brings a letter to the Chief
from Favre. What can he want?
Shortly after 7 p.m. Favre arrived, and the Chancellor had an
interview with him, which lasted about two and a half hours. In the
meantime Hatzfeldt and Bismarck-Bohlen conversed down stairs in
the drawing-room with the gentleman who accompanied Favre, and
who is understood to be his son-in-law, del Rio. He is a portrait
painter by profession, but came with his father-in-law in the capacity
of secretary. Both were treated to a hastily improvised meal,
consisting of cutlets, scrambled eggs, ham, &c., which will doubtless
have been welcome to these poor martyrs to their own obstinacy.
Shortly after 10 o’clock they drove off, accompanied by Hatzfeldt, to
the lodgings assigned to them in a house on the Boulevard du Roi,
where Stieber and the military police also happen to have their
quarters. Hatzfeldt accompanied the gentlemen there. Favre looked
very depressed.
The Chief drove off to see the King at 10.30 p.m., returning in
about three-quarters of an hour. He looks exceedingly pleased as he
enters the room where we are sitting at tea. He first asks me to pour
him out a cup of tea, and he eats a few mouthfuls of bread with it.
After a while he says to his cousin, “Do you know this?” and then
whistled a short tune, the signal of the hunter that he has brought
down the deer. Bohlen replies, “Yes, in at the death.” The Chief: “No,
this way,” and he whistled again. “A hallali,” he adds. “I think the
thing is finished.” Bohlen remarked that Favre looked “awfully
shabby.” The Chief said: “I find he has grown much greyer than
when I saw him at Ferrières—also stouter, probably on horseflesh.
Otherwise he looks like one who has been through a great deal of
trouble and excitement lately, and to whom everything is now
indifferent. Moreover, he was very frank, and confessed that things
are not going on well in Paris. I also ascertained from him that
Trochu has been superseded. Vinoy is now in command of the city.”
Bohlen then related that Martinez del Rio was exceedingly reserved.
They, for their part, had not tried to pump him; but they once inquired
how things were going on at the Villa Rothschild in the Bois de
Boulogne, where Thiers said the General Staff of the Paris army was
quartered. Del Rio answered curtly that he did not know. For the rest,
they had talked solely about high-class restaurants in Paris, which,
they acknowledged, was an unmannerly thing to do. Hatzfeldt on his
return, after conducting the two Parisians to their lodgings, reported
that Favre was glad to have arrived after dark, and that he does not
wish to go out in the daytime in order not to create a sensation, and
to avoid being pestered by the Versailles people.
Tuesday, January 24th.—The Chief gets up before 9 o’clock and
works with Abeken. Shortly before 10 he drives off to see the King,
or, let us now say, the Emperor. It is nearly 1 o’clock when he
returns. We are still at lunch, and he sits down and takes some roast
ham and a glass of Tivoli beer. After a while he heaves a sigh and
says: “Until now I always thought that Parliamentary negotiations
were the slowest of all, but I no longer think so. There was at least
one way of escape there—to move ‘that the question should be now
put.’ But here everybody says whatever occurs to him, and when
one imagines the matter is finally settled, somebody brings forward
an argument that has already been disposed of, and so the whole
thing has to be gone over again, which is quite hopeless. That is
stewing thought to rags—mere flatulence which people ought really
to be able to restrain. Well, it’s all the same to me! I even prefer that
nothing should have been yet decided or shall be decided till to-
morrow. It is merely the waste of time in having to listen to them, but
of course such people do not think of that.” The Chief then said that
he expected Favre to call upon him again, and that he had advised
him to leave at 3 o’clock (Favre wishes to return to Paris) “on
account of the soldiers who would challenge him after dark, and to
whom he could not reply.”