History of Topics in Special Relativity/Lorentz transformation (velocity)

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search
History of Topics in Special Relativity: History of Lorentz transformation (edit)

Lorentz transformation via velocity[edit | edit source]

Boosts[edit | edit source]

In the w:theory of relativity, Lorentz transformations exhibit the symmetry of w:Minkowski spacetime by using a constant c as the w:speed of light, and a parameter v as the relative w:velocity between two w:inertial reference frames. In particular, the hyperbolic angle can be interpreted as the velocity related w:rapidity , so that is the w:Lorentz factor, the w:proper velocity, the velocity of another object, the w:velocity-addition formula, thus equation (3b) becomes:






Or in four dimensions and by setting and adding an unchanged z the familiar form follows






Without relation to physics, similar transformations have been used by Lipschitz (1885/86). In physics, analogous transformations have been introduced by Voigt (1887) and by Lorentz (1892, 1895) who analyzed w:Maxwell's equations, they were completed by Larmor (1897, 1900) and Lorentz (1899, 1904), and brought into their modern form by Poincaré (1905) who gave the transformation the name of Lorentz.[1] Eventually, Einstein (1905) showed in his development of w:special relativity that the transformations follow from the w:principle of relativity and constant light speed alone by modifying the traditional concepts of space and time, without requiring a mechanical aether in contradistinction to Lorentz and Poincaré.[2] Minkowski (1907–1908) used them to argue that space and time are inseparably connected as w:spacetime. Minkowski (1907–1908) and Varićak (1910) showed the relation to imaginary and hyperbolic functions. Important contributions to the mathematical understanding of the Lorentz transformation were also made by other authors such as Herglotz (1909/10), Ignatowski (1910), Noether (1910) and Klein (1910), Borel (1913–14).

Velocity addition and aberration[edit | edit source]

In line with the general Lorentz transformation (1b), one can substitute in (4a ), producing the Lorentz transformation of velocities (or w:velocity addition formula) in analogy to Beltrami coordinates of equation (3e):






or using trigonometric and hyperbolic identities it becomes the hyperbolic law of cosines in terms of equation (3f):[3][R 1][4]






and by further setting u=u′=c the relativistic w:aberration of light follows:[5]






Without reference to velocity and physics, Beltrami (1868) and Schur (1900/02) provided formulas very similar to (4c , 4d ), while its interpretation as velocity addition formulas was given by Einstein (1905) and Poincaré (1905/06), the aberration formula for cos(α) by Einstein (1905), while the relations to the spherical and hyperbolic law of cosines were given by Sommerfeld (1909) and Varićak (1910). These formulas resemble the equations of an w:ellipse of eccentricity v/c, w:eccentric anomaly α' and w:true anomaly α, first geometrically formulated by Kepler (1609) and explicitly written down by Euler (1735, 1748), Lagrange (1770) and many others in relation to planetary motions.[6][7]

Vectorial Lorentz transformation[edit | edit source]

Also Lorentz boosts for arbitrary directions in line with general Lorentz transformation (1a) can be given as:[8]

or in vector notation






The corresponding vectorial velocity addition formula in line with general Lorentz transformation (1b) is given by






Such transformations were formulated by Ignatowski (1910), Herglotz (1911) and others.

Historical notation[edit | edit source]

Euler (1735) – True and eccentric anomaly[edit | edit source]

w:Johannes Kepler (1609) geometrically formulated w:Kepler's equation and the relations between the mean, true, and w:eccentric anomaly.[M 1][9] The relation between the true anomaly z and the eccentric anomaly P was algebraically expressed by w:Leonhard Euler (1735/40) as follows:[M 2]

and in 1748:[M 3]

while w:Joseph-Louis Lagrange (1770/71) expressed them as follows[M 4]

By identifying the eccentricity with v/c, these relations resemble the relativistic aberration formulas (4e ) so that the true/eccentric anomalies become angles measured in different inertial frames,[6] and the relativistic velocity addition (4c ) follows by setting in Euler's formulas or in Lagrange's formulas.[7]

Beltrami (1868) – Beltrami coordinates[edit | edit source]

w:Eugenio Beltrami (1868a) introduced coordinates of the w:Beltrami–Klein model of hyperbolic geometry, and formulated the corresponding transformations in terms of homographies:[M 5]

(where the disk radius a and the w:radius of curvature R are real in spherical geometry, in hyperbolic geometry they are imaginary), and for arbitrary dimensions in (1868b)[M 6]

Setting a=a0=c as speed of light and r0=v as the relative velocity, Beltrami's (1868a) formulas become the relativistic velocity addition formulas (4c ). In his (1868b) formulas, one sets a=b=c and a1=v for velocity addition in arbitrary dimensions.

Schur (1885/86, 1900/02) – Beltrami coordinates[edit | edit source]

w:Friedrich Schur (1885/86) discussed spaces of constant Riemann curvature, and by following Beltrami (1868) he used the transformation[M 7]

This is equivalent to the relativistic velocity addition (4c ) in arbitrary dimensions by setting R=c as the speed of light and a1=v as relative velocity.

In (1900/02) he derived basic formulas of non-Eucliden geometry, including the case of translation for which he obtained the transformation similar to his previous one:[M 8]

where can have values >0, <0 or ∞.

This is equivalent to the relativistic velocity addition (4c ) by setting a=v and .

He also defined the triangle[10]

This is equivalent to the hyperbolic law of cosines and the relativistic velocity addition (4d ) by setting .

Lipschitz (1885–86)[edit | edit source]

w:Rudolf Lipschitz (1885/86) formulated transformations leaving invariant the sum of squares , which he rewrote as . This led to the problem of finding transformations leaving invariant the pairs (a=1...n) for which he gave the following solution:[M 9]


Equation (c) is very similar to the Doppler factor and (d) to the standard Lorentz boost (4a ). However, because of both the square root and the composition of x- and y- variables differ from (4a ), whereas in relativity one uses as velocity smaller than the speed of light to obtain

Voigt (1887)[edit | edit source]

w:Woldemar Voigt (1887)[R 2] developed a transformation in connection with the w:Doppler effect and an incompressible medium, being in modern notation:[11][12]

If the right-hand sides of his equations are multiplied by γ they are the modern Lorentz transformation (4b ). In Voigt's theory the speed of light is invariant, but his transformations mix up a relativistic boost together with a rescaling of space-time. Optical phenomena in free space are scale, conformal (using the factor λ discussed above), and Lorentz invariant, so the combination is invariant too.[12] For instance, Lorentz transformations can be extended by using :[R 3]


l=1/γ gives the Voigt transformation, l=1 the Lorentz transformation. But scale transformations are not a symmetry of all the laws of nature, only of electromagnetism, so these transformations cannot be used to formulate a w:principle of relativity in general. It was demonstrated by Poincaré and Einstein that one has to set l=1 in order to make the above transformation symmetric and to form a group as required by the relativity principle, therefore the Lorentz transformation is the only viable choice.

Voigt sent his 1887 paper to Lorentz in 1908,[13] and that was acknowledged in 1909:

Also w:Hermann Minkowski said in 1908 that the transformations which play the main role in the principle of relativity were first examined by Voigt in 1887. Voigt responded in the same paper by saying that his theory was based on an elastic theory of light, not an electromagnetic one. However, he concluded that some results were actually the same.[R 5]

Heaviside (1888), Thomson (1889), Searle (1896)[edit | edit source]

In 1888, w:Oliver Heaviside[R 6] investigated the properties of charges in motion according to Maxwell's electrodynamics. He calculated, among other things, anisotropies in the electric field of moving bodies represented by this formula:[14]


Consequently, w:Joseph John Thomson (1889)[R 7] found a way to substantially simplify calculations concerning moving charges by using the following mathematical transformation (like other authors such as Lorentz or Larmor, also Thomson implicitly used the w:Galilean transformation z-vt in his equation[15]):

Thereby, w:inhomogeneous electromagnetic wave equations are transformed into a w:Poisson equation.[15] Eventually, w:George Frederick Charles Searle[R 8] noted in (1896) that Heaviside's expression leads to a deformation of electric fields which he called "Heaviside-Ellipsoid" of w:axial ratio


Lorentz (1892, 1895)[edit | edit source]

In order to explain the w:aberration of light and the result of the w:Fizeau experiment in accordance with w:Maxwell's equations, Lorentz in 1892 developed a model ("w:Lorentz ether theory") in which the aether is completely motionless, and the speed of light in the aether is constant in all directions. In order to calculate the optics of moving bodies, Lorentz introduced the following quantities to transform from the aether system into a moving system (it's unknown whether he was influenced by Voigt, Heaviside, and Thomson)[R 9][16]

where x* is the w:Galilean transformation x-vt. Except the additional γ in the time transformation, this is the complete Lorentz transformation (4b ).[16] While t is the "true" time for observers resting in the aether, t′ is an auxiliary variable only for calculating processes for moving systems. It is also important that Lorentz and later also Larmor formulated this transformation in two steps. At first an implicit Galilean transformation, and later the expansion into the "fictitious" electromagnetic system with the aid of the Lorentz transformation. In order to explain the negative result of the w:Michelson–Morley experiment, he (1892b)[R 10] introduced the additional hypothesis that also intermolecular forces are affected in a similar way and introduced w:length contraction in his theory (without proof as he admitted). The same hypothesis was already made by w:George FitzGerald in 1889 based on Heaviside's work. While length contraction was a real physical effect for Lorentz, he considered the time transformation only as a heuristic working hypothesis and a mathematical stipulation.

In 1895, Lorentz further elaborated on his theory and introduced the "theorem of corresponding states". This theorem states that a moving observer (relative to the ether) in his "fictitious" field makes the same observations as a resting observers in his "real" field for velocities to first order in v/c. Lorentz showed that the dimensions of electrostatic systems in the ether and a moving frame are connected by this transformation:[R 11]

For solving optical problems Lorentz used the following transformation, in which the modified time variable was called "local time" (German: Ortszeit) by him:[R 12]

With this concept Lorentz could explain the w:Doppler effect, the w:aberration of light, and the w:Fizeau experiment.[17]

Larmor (1897, 1900)[edit | edit source]

In 1897, Larmor extended the work of Lorentz and derived the following transformation[R 13]

Larmor noted that if it is assumed that the constitution of molecules is electrical then the FitzGerald–Lorentz contraction is a consequence of this transformation, explaining the w:Michelson–Morley experiment. It's notable that Larmor was the first who recognized that some sort of w:time dilation is a consequence of this transformation as well, because "individual electrons describe corresponding parts of their orbits in times shorter for the [rest] system in the ratio 1/γ".[18][19] Larmor wrote his electrodynamical equations and transformations neglecting terms of higher order than (v/c)2 – when his 1897 paper was reprinted in 1929, Larmor added the following comment in which he described how they can be made valid to all orders of v/c:[R 14]

In line with that comment, in his book Aether and Matter published in 1900, Larmor used a modified local time t″=t′-εvx′/c2 instead of the 1897 expression t′=t-vx/c2 by replacing v/c2 with εv/c2, so that t″ is now identical to the one given by Lorentz in 1892, which he combined with a Galilean transformation for the x′, y′, z′, t′ coordinates:[R 15]

Larmor knew that the Michelson–Morley experiment was accurate enough to detect an effect of motion depending on the factor (v/c)2, and so he sought the transformations which were "accurate to second order" (as he put it). Thus he wrote the final transformations (where x′=x-vt and t″ as given above) as:[R 16]

by which he arrived at the complete Lorentz transformation (4b ). Larmor showed that Maxwell's equations were invariant under this two-step transformation, "to second order in v/c" – it was later shown by Lorentz (1904) and Poincaré (1905) that they are indeed invariant under this transformation to all orders in v/c.

Larmor gave credit to Lorentz in two papers published in 1904, in which he used the term "Lorentz transformation" for Lorentz's first order transformations of coordinates and field configurations:

Lorentz (1899, 1904)[edit | edit source]

Also Lorentz extended his theorem of corresponding states in 1899. First he wrote a transformation equivalent to the one from 1892 (again, x* must be replaced by x-vt):[R 19]

Then he introduced a factor ε of which he said he has no means of determining it, and modified his transformation as follows (where the above value of t′ has to be inserted):[R 20]

This is equivalent to the complete Lorentz transformation (4b ) when solved for x″ and t″ and with ε=1. Like Larmor, Lorentz noticed in 1899[R 21] also some sort of time dilation effect in relation to the frequency of oscillating electrons "that in S the time of vibrations be times as great as in S0", where S0 is the aether frame.[20]

In 1904 he rewrote the equations in the following form by setting l=1/ε (again, x* must be replaced by x-vt):[R 22]

Under the assumption that l=1 when v=0, he demonstrated that l=1 must be the case at all velocities, therefore length contraction can only arise in the line of motion. So by setting the factor l to unity, Lorentz's transformations now assumed the same form as Larmor's and are now completed. Unlike Larmor, who restricted himself to show the covariance of Maxwell's equations to second order, Lorentz tried to widen its covariance to all orders in v/c. He also derived the correct formulas for the velocity dependence of w:electromagnetic mass, and concluded that the transformation formulas must apply to all forces of nature, not only electrical ones.[R 23] However, he didn't achieve full covariance of the transformation equations for charge density and velocity.[21] When the 1904 paper was reprinted in 1913, Lorentz therefore added the following remark:[22]

Lorentz's 1904 transformation was cited and used by w:Alfred Bucherer in July 1904:[R 24]

or by w:Wilhelm Wien in July 1904:[R 25]

or by w:Emil Cohn in November 1904 (setting the speed of light to unity):[R 26]

or by w:Richard Gans in February 1905:[R 27]

Poincaré (1900, 1905)[edit | edit source]

Local time[edit | edit source]

Neither Lorentz or Larmor gave a clear physical interpretation of the origin of local time. However, w:Henri Poincaré in 1900 commented on the origin of Lorentz's "wonderful invention" of local time.[23] He remarked that it arose when clocks in a moving reference frame are synchronised by exchanging signals which are assumed to travel with the same speed in both directions, which lead to what is nowadays called w:relativity of simultaneity, although Poincaré's calculation does not involve length contraction or time dilation.[R 28] In order to synchronise the clocks here on Earth (the x*, t* frame) a light signal from one clock (at the origin) is sent to another (at x*), and is sent back. It's supposed that the Earth is moving with speed v in the x-direction (= x*-direction) in some rest system (x, t) (i.e. the w:luminiferous aether system for Lorentz and Larmor). The time of flight outwards is

and the time of flight back is


The elapsed time on the clock when the signal is returned is δta+δtb and the time t*=(δta+δtb)/2 is ascribed to the moment when the light signal reached the distant clock. In the rest frame the time t=δta is ascribed to that same instant. Some algebra gives the relation between the different time coordinates ascribed to the moment of reflection. Thus

identical to Lorentz (1892). By dropping the factor γ2 under the assumption that , Poincaré gave the result t*=t-vx*/c2, which is the form used by Lorentz in 1895.

Similar physical interpretations of local time were later given by w:Emil Cohn (1904)[R 29] and w:Max Abraham (1905).[R 30]

Lorentz transformation[edit | edit source]

On June 5, 1905 (published June 9) Poincaré formulated transformation equations which are algebraically equivalent to those of Larmor and Lorentz and gave them the modern form (4b ):[R 31]


Apparently Poincaré was unaware of Larmor's contributions, because he only mentioned Lorentz and therefore used for the first time the name "Lorentz transformation".[24][25] Poincaré set the speed of light to unity, pointed out the group characteristics of the transformation by setting l=1, and modified/corrected Lorentz's derivation of the equations of electrodynamics in some details in order to fully satisfy the principle of relativity, i.e. making them fully Lorentz covariant.[26]

In July 1905 (published in January 1906)[R 32] Poincaré showed in detail how the transformations and electrodynamic equations are a consequence of the w:principle of least action; he demonstrated in more detail the group characteristics of the transformation, which he called w:Lorentz group, and he showed that the combination x2+y2+z2-t2 is invariant. He noticed that the Lorentz transformation is merely a rotation in four-dimensional space about the origin by introducing as a fourth imaginary coordinate, and he used an early form of w:four-vectors. He also formulated the velocity addition formula (4c ), which he had already derived in unpublished letters to Lorentz from May 1905:[R 33]


Einstein (1905) – Special relativity[edit | edit source]

On June 30, 1905 (published September 1905) Einstein published what is now called w:special relativity and gave a new derivation of the transformation, which was based only on the principle on relativity and the principle of the constancy of the speed of light. While Lorentz considered "local time" to be a mathematical stipulation device for explaining the Michelson-Morley experiment, Einstein showed that the coordinates given by the Lorentz transformation were in fact the inertial coordinates of relatively moving frames of reference. For quantities of first order in v/c this was also done by Poincaré in 1900, while Einstein derived the complete transformation by this method. Unlike Lorentz and Poincaré who still distinguished between real time in the aether and apparent time for moving observers, Einstein showed that the transformations concern the nature of space and time.[27][28][29]

The notation for this transformation is equivalent to Poincaré's of 1905 and (4b ), except that Einstein didn't set the speed of light to unity:[R 34]

Einstein also defined the velocity addition formula (4c , 4d ):[R 35]

and the light aberration formula (4e ):[R 36]

Minkowski (1907–1908) – Spacetime[edit | edit source]

The work on the principle of relativity by Lorentz, Einstein, Planck, together with Poincaré's four-dimensional approach, were further elaborated and combined with the w:hyperboloid model by w:Hermann Minkowski in 1907 and 1908.[R 37][R 38] Minkowski particularly reformulated electrodynamics in a four-dimensional way (w:Minkowski spacetime).[30] For instance, he wrote x, y, z, it in the form x1, x2, x3, x4. By defining ψ as the angle of rotation around the z-axis, the Lorentz transformation assumes a form (with c=1) in agreement with (2b ):[R 39]

Even though Minkowski used the imaginary number iψ, he for once[R 39] directly used the w:tangens hyperbolicus in the equation for velocity

with .

Minkowski's expression can also by written as ψ=atanh(q) and was later called w:rapidity. He also wrote the Lorentz transformation in matrix form equivalent to (2a ) (n=3):[R 40]

As a graphical representation of the Lorentz transformation he introduced the w:Minkowski diagram, which became a standard tool in textbooks and research articles on relativity:[R 41]

Original spacetime diagram by Minkowski in 1908.

Sommerfeld (1909) – Spherical trigonometry[edit | edit source]

Using an imaginary rapidity such as Minkowski, w:Arnold Sommerfeld (1909) formulated a transformation equivalent to Lorentz boost (4b ), and the relativistc velocity addition (4c ) in terms of trigonometric functions and the w:spherical law of cosines:[R 42]

Herglotz (1909/10) – Möbius transformation[edit | edit source]

Following Klein (1889–1897) and Fricke & Klein (1897) concerning the Cayley absolute, hyperbolic motion and its transformation, w:Gustav Herglotz (1909/10) classified the one-parameter Lorentz transformations as loxodromic, hyperbolic, parabolic and elliptic. The general case (on the left) equivalent to Lorentz transformation (6a ) and the hyperbolic case (on the right) equivalent to Lorentz transformation (3d ) or squeeze mapping (9d ) are as follows:[R 43]

Varićak (1910) – Hyperbolic functions[edit | edit source]

Following Sommerfeld (1909), hyperbolic functions were used by w:Vladimir Varićak in several papers starting from 1910, who represented the equations of special relativity on the basis of w:hyperbolic geometry in terms of Weierstrass coordinates. For instance, by setting l=ct and v/c=tanh(u) with u as rapidity he wrote the Lorentz transformation in agreement with (4b ):[R 44]

and showed the relation of rapidity to the w:Gudermannian function and the w:angle of parallelism:[R 44]

He also related the velocity addition to the w:hyperbolic law of cosines:[R 45]

Subsequently, other authors such as w:E. T. Whittaker (1910) or w:Alfred Robb (1911, who coined the name rapidity) used similar expressions, which are still used in modern textbooks.[31]

Ignatowski (1910)[edit | edit source]

While earlier derivations and formulations of the Lorentz transformation relied from the outset on optics, electrodynamics, or the invariance of the speed of light, w:Vladimir Ignatowski (1910) showed that it is possible to use the principle of relativity (and related group theoretical principles) alone, in order to derive the following transformation between two inertial frames:[R 46][R 47]

The variable n can be seen as a space-time constant whose value has to be determined by experiment or taken from a known physical law such as electrodynamics. For that purpose, Ignatowski used the above-mentioned Heaviside ellipsoid representing a contraction of electrostatic fields by x/γ in the direction of motion. It can be seen that this is only consistent with Ignatowski's transformation when n=1/c2, resulting in p=γ and the Lorentz transformation (4b ). With n=0, no length changes arise and the Galilean transformation follows. Ignatowski's method was further developed and improved by w:Philipp Frank and w:Hermann Rothe (1911, 1912),[R 48] with various authors developing similar methods in subsequent years.[32]

Noether (1910), Klein (1910) – Quaternions[edit | edit source]

w:Felix Klein (1908) described Cayley's (1854) 4D quaternion multiplications as "Drehstreckungen" (orthogonal substitutions in terms of rotations leaving invariant a quadratic form up to a factor), and pointed out that the modern principle of relativity as provided by Minkowski is essentially only the consequent application of such Drehstreckungen, even though he didn't provide details.[R 49]

In an appendix to Klein's and Sommerfeld's "Theory of the top" (1910), w:Fritz Noether showed how to formulate hyperbolic rotations using biquaternions with , which he also related to the speed of light by setting ω2=-c2. He concluded that this is the principal ingredient for a rational representation of the group of Lorentz transformations:[R 50]

Besides citing quaternion related standard works such as Cayley (1854), Noether referred to the entries in Klein's encyclopedia by w:Eduard Study (1899) and the French version by w:Élie Cartan (1908).[33] Cartan's version contains a description of Study's w:dual numbers, Clifford's biquaternions (including the choice for hyperbolic geometry), and Clifford algebra, with references to Stephanos (1883), Buchheim (1884/85), Vahlen (1901/02) and others.

Citing Noether, Klein himself published in August 1910 the following quaternion substitutions forming the group of Lorentz transformations:[R 51]

or in March 1911[R 52]

Conway (1911), Silberstein (1911) – Quaternions[edit | edit source]

w:Arthur W. Conway in February 1911 explicitly formulated quaternionic Lorentz transformations of various electromagnetic quantities in terms of velocity λ:[R 53]

Also w:Ludwik Silberstein in November 1911[R 54] as well as in 1914,[34] formulated the Lorentz transformation in terms of velocity v:

Silberstein cites Cayley (1854, 1855) and Study's encyclopedia entry (in the extended French version of Cartan in 1908), as well as the appendix of Klein's and Sommerfeld's book.

Ignatowski (1910/11), Herglotz (1911), and others – Vector transformation[edit | edit source]

w:Vladimir Ignatowski (1910, published 1911) defined the vectorial velocity addition (4g ) as well as general Lorentz boost (4f ) as[R 55]

An equivalent transformation was given by w:Gustav Herglotz (1911)[R 56] using v=(vx, vy, vz) and r=(x, y, z):

Or by w:Ludwik Silberstein (1911 on the left, 1914 on the right):[R 57]

w:Erwin Madelung (1922) provided the matrix form[35]

These formulas were called "general Lorentz transformation without rotation" by w:Christian Møller (1952),[36] who in addition gave an even more general Lorentz transformation in which the Cartesian axes have different orientations, using a rotation operator . In this case, v′=(v′x, v′y, v′z) is not equal to -v=(-vx, -vy, -vz), but the relation holds instead, with the result

Borel (1913–14) – Cayley–Hermite parameter[edit | edit source]

Borel (1913) started by demonstrating Euclidean motions using Euler-Rodrigues parameter in three dimensions, and Cayley's (1846) parameter in four dimensions. Then he demonstrated the connection to indefinite quadratic forms expressing hyperbolic motions and Lorentz transformations. In three dimensions equivalent to (5b ):[R 58]

In four dimensions:[R 59]

Gruner (1921) – Trigonometric Lorentz boosts[edit | edit source]

In order to simplify the graphical representation of Minkowski space, w:Paul Gruner (1921) (with the aid of Josef Sauter) developed what is now called w:Loedel diagrams, using the following relations:[R 60]

In another paper Gruner used the alternative relations:[R 61]

References[edit | edit source]

Historical mathematical sources[edit | edit source]

  1. Kepler (1609), chapter 60. The editors of Kepler's collected papers remark (p. 482), that Kepler's relations correspond to and and
  2. Euler (1735/40), § 19
  3. Euler (1748a), section VIII
  4. Lagrange (1770/71), section I
  5. Beltrami (1868a), pp. 287-288; Note I; Note II
  6. Beltrami (1868b), pp. 232, 240–241, 253–254
  7. Schur (1885/86), p. 167
  8. Schur (1900/02), p. 290; (1909), p. 83
  9. Lipschitz (1886), pp. 90–92

Historical relativity sources[edit | edit source]

  1. Varićak (1912), p. 108
  2. Voigt (1887), p. 45
  3. Lorentz (1915/16), p. 197
  4. Lorentz (1915/16), p. 198
  5. Bucherer (1908), p. 762
  6. Heaviside (1888), p. 324
  7. Thomson (1889), p. 12
  8. Searle (1886), p. 333
  9. Lorentz (1892a), p. 141
  10. Lorentz (1892b), p. 141
  11. Lorentz (1895), p. 37
  12. Lorentz (1895), p. 49 for local time and p. 56 for spatial coordinates.
  13. Larmor (1897), p. 229
  14. Larmor (1897/1929), p. 39
  15. Larmor (1900), p. 168
  16. Larmor (1900), p. 174
  17. Larmor (1904a), p. 583, 585
  18. Larmor (1904b), p. 622
  19. Lorentz (1899), p. 429
  20. Lorentz (1899), p. 439
  21. Lorentz (1899), p. 442
  22. Lorentz (1904), p. 812
  23. Lorentz (1904), p. 826
  24. Bucherer, p. 129; Definition of s on p. 32
  25. Wien (1904), p. 394
  26. Cohn (1904a), pp. 1296-1297
  27. Gans (1905), p. 169
  28. Poincaré (1900), pp. 272–273
  29. Cohn (1904b), p. 1408
  30. Abraham (1905), § 42
  31. Poincaré (1905), p. 1505
  32. Poincaré (1905/06), pp. 129ff
  33. Poincaré (1905/06), p. 144
  34. Einstein (1905), p. 902
  35. Einstein (1905), § 5 and § 9
  36. Einstein (1905), § 7
  37. Minkowski (1907/15), pp. 927ff
  38. Minkowski (1907/08), pp. 53ff
  39. 39.0 39.1 Minkowski (1907/08), p. 59
  40. Minkowski (1907/08), pp. 65–66, 81–82
  41. Minkowski (1908/09), p. 77
  42. Sommerfeld (1909), p. 826ff.
  43. Herglotz (1909/10), pp. 404-408
  44. 44.0 44.1 Varićak (1910), p. 93
  45. Varićak (1910), p. 94
  46. Ignatowski (1910), pp. 973–974
  47. Ignatowski (1910/11ab)
  48. Frank & Rothe (1911), pp. 825ff; (1912), p. 750ff.
  49. Klein (1908), p. 165
  50. Noether (1910), pp. 939–943
  51. Klein (1910), p. 300
  52. Klein (1911), pp. 602ff.
  53. Conway (1911), p. 8
  54. Silberstein (1911/12), p. 793
  55. Ignatowski (1910/11a), p. 23; (1910/11b), p. 22
  56. Herglotz (1911), p. 497
  57. Silberstein (1911/12), p. 792; (1914), p. 123
  58. Borel (1913/14), p. 39
  59. Borel (1913/14), p. 41
  60. Gruner (1921a),
  61. Gruner (1921b)
  • Brill, J. (1925). "Note on the Lorentz group". Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 22 (5): 630. doi:10.1017/S030500410000949X. 
  • Bucherer, A. H. (1904). Mathematische Einführung in die Elektronentheorie. Leipzig: Teubner. https://archive.org/details/mathematischeei02buchgoog. 
  • Bucherer, A. H. (1908), "Messungen an Becquerelstrahlen. Die experimentelle Bestätigung der Lorentz-Einsteinschen Theorie. (Measurements of Becquerel rays. The Experimental Confirmation of the Lorentz-Einstein Theory)", Physikalische Zeitschrift, 9 (22): 758–762. For Minkowski's and Voigt's statements see p. 762.
  • Cunningham, Ebenezer (1910) [1909]. "The principle of Relativity in Electrodynamics and an Extension Thereof". Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society 8: 77–98. doi:10.1112/plms/s2-8.1.77. 
  • Grammel, R. (1913), "Zur relativitätstheoretischen Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper", Annalen der Physik, 346 (8): 570–580, doi:10.1002/andp.19133460805
  • Henschke, E. (1913) [1912], "Über eine Form des Prinzips der kleinsten Wirkung in der Elektrodynamik des Relativitätsprinzips", Annalen der Physik, 345 (5): 887–934, doi:10.1002/andp.19133450505