Arsthbt

can i play a electric guitar through a bass amp?

Fencing style for blades that can attack from a distance

Arthur Somervell: 1000 Exercises - Meaning of this notation

Can an x86 CPU running in real mode be considered to be basically an 8086 CPU?

Languages that we cannot (dis)prove to be Context-Free

Why don't electron-positron collisions release infinite energy?

What is the word for reserving something for yourself before others do?

How do we improve the relationship with a client software team that performs poorly and is becoming less collaborative?

A newer friend of my brother's gave him a load of baseball cards that are supposedly extremely valuable. Is this a scam?

Can I make popcorn with any corn?

Modeling an IP Address

Voyeurism but not really

Watching something be written to a file live with tail

Font hinting is lost in Chrome-like browsers (for some languages )

Is it important to consider tone, melody, and musical form while writing a song?

What are these boxed doors outside store fronts in New York?

Why "Having chlorophyll without photosynthesis is actually very dangerous" and "like living with a bomb"?

What is the offset in a seaplane's hull?

Minkowski space

Pattern match does not work in bash script

What do the dots in this tr command do: tr .............A-Z A-ZA-Z <<< "JVPQBOV" (with 13 dots)

Theorems that impeded progress

Is it possible to do 50 km distance without any previous training?

Are the number of citations and number of published articles the most important criteria for a tenure promotion?

Minkowski space

Minkowski MetricMinkowski Metric SignatureMinkowski metric — why does it follow from the constancy of the speed of light?Minkowski spacetime: Is there a signature (+,+,+,+)?Minkowski spacetime vs Euclidian spaceMinkowski metric: Why does it look like it does?Understanding space-like hyperplanes in Minkowski spaceCausality in general relativityCan an a distance in Minkowski space, based on a Euclidean plane, be time-like?How to Construct Proper Spherical Coordinates in Minkowski Spacetime?

1

$begingroup$

1) In Minkowski space, coordinates which satisfy

x²=t²-X²>0

Region of spacetime is time-like.

2) If its

x²=t²-X²<0

Region is space-like.

3) But if

x²=t²-X²=0

then its "trajectory of light-like particles".

I have understood the first two points about time and space like region but I could not get the third one about "light like particles".
My confusion is about why just light like particles? there are many other particles at quantum level.

special-relativity mass metric-tensor causality

share|cite|improve this question

edited 39 mins ago

Qmechanic♦

107k121991239

asked 1 hour ago

sk9298sk9298

595

New contributor

sk9298 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

1

$begingroup$

1) In Minkowski space, coordinates which satisfy

x²=t²-X²>0

Region of spacetime is time-like.

2) If its

x²=t²-X²<0

Region is space-like.

3) But if

x²=t²-X²=0

then its "trajectory of light-like particles".

I have understood the first two points about time and space like region but I could not get the third one about "light like particles".
My confusion is about why just light like particles? there are many other particles at quantum level.

special-relativity mass metric-tensor causality

share|cite|improve this question

edited 39 mins ago

Qmechanic♦

107k121991239

asked 1 hour ago

sk9298sk9298

595

New contributor

sk9298 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

1) In Minkowski space, coordinates which satisfy

x²=t²-X²>0

Region of spacetime is time-like.

2) If its

x²=t²-X²<0

Region is space-like.

3) But if

x²=t²-X²=0

then its "trajectory of light-like particles".

I have understood the first two points about time and space like region but I could not get the third one about "light like particles".
My confusion is about why just light like particles? there are many other particles at quantum level.

special-relativity mass metric-tensor causality

share|cite|improve this question

edited 39 mins ago

Qmechanic♦

107k121991239

asked 1 hour ago

sk9298sk9298

595

New contributor

sk9298 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

share|cite|improve this question

edited 39 mins ago

Qmechanic♦

107k121991239

asked 1 hour ago

sk9298sk9298

595

New contributor

sk9298 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

share|cite|improve this question

edited 39 mins ago

Qmechanic♦

107k121991239

asked 1 hour ago

sk9298sk9298

595

New contributor

sk9298 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

edited 39 mins ago

Qmechanic♦

107k121991239

edited 39 mins ago

Qmechanic♦

107k121991239

asked 1 hour ago

sk9298sk9298

595

New contributor

sk9298 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

asked 1 hour ago

sk9298sk9298

595

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

2

$begingroup$

My confusion is about why just light like particles? there are many other particles at quantum level.

You are correct. The terminology is historical in nature. Light was the first massless particle to be discovered. The terminology “lightlike” was established before any other massless particles were discovered. Once other massless particles were discovered it was shown that they also travel along lightlike geodesics, but by then the term “lightlike” was well established.

An alternative term with the same meaning as “lightlike” is “null”. If you prefer then you can always use “null” and just understand that people saying “lightlike” mean the same thing.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

DaleDale

6,5871829

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

1

$begingroup$

Only particles with zero mass can travel between two events which are separated by a light-like distance. The trajectory is called light-like because photons (light) are massless, and historically the first example of a massless particle, as well as the only example in the 1910's. There are other massless particles, like gluons which would also be able to travel between two events separated by a light-like distance.

The reason why only massless particles are able to travel between two events separated by a light-like distance is that it requires you to travel at exactly the speed of light. You can see this by considering the equation $t^2-x^2=0$, this means that $x=pm t$. These equations are with the units such that the speed of light $c=1$. Thus the particle taking this trajectory is travelling at the speed of light.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

LucashWindowWasherLucashWindowWasher

30311

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

Your Answer

StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "151"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);

sk9298 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f470979%2fminkowski-space%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

2

$begingroup$

My confusion is about why just light like particles? there are many other particles at quantum level.

You are correct. The terminology is historical in nature. Light was the first massless particle to be discovered. The terminology “lightlike” was established before any other massless particles were discovered. Once other massless particles were discovered it was shown that they also travel along lightlike geodesics, but by then the term “lightlike” was well established.

An alternative term with the same meaning as “lightlike” is “null”. If you prefer then you can always use “null” and just understand that people saying “lightlike” mean the same thing.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

DaleDale

6,5871829

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

2

$begingroup$

My confusion is about why just light like particles? there are many other particles at quantum level.

You are correct. The terminology is historical in nature. Light was the first massless particle to be discovered. The terminology “lightlike” was established before any other massless particles were discovered. Once other massless particles were discovered it was shown that they also travel along lightlike geodesics, but by then the term “lightlike” was well established.

An alternative term with the same meaning as “lightlike” is “null”. If you prefer then you can always use “null” and just understand that people saying “lightlike” mean the same thing.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

DaleDale

6,5871829

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

My confusion is about why just light like particles? there are many other particles at quantum level.

You are correct. The terminology is historical in nature. Light was the first massless particle to be discovered. The terminology “lightlike” was established before any other massless particles were discovered. Once other massless particles were discovered it was shown that they also travel along lightlike geodesics, but by then the term “lightlike” was well established.

An alternative term with the same meaning as “lightlike” is “null”. If you prefer then you can always use “null” and just understand that people saying “lightlike” mean the same thing.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

DaleDale

6,5871829

$endgroup$

share|cite|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

DaleDale

6,5871829

answered 1 hour ago

DaleDale

6,5871829

answered 1 hour ago

DaleDale

6,5871829

1

$begingroup$

Only particles with zero mass can travel between two events which are separated by a light-like distance. The trajectory is called light-like because photons (light) are massless, and historically the first example of a massless particle, as well as the only example in the 1910's. There are other massless particles, like gluons which would also be able to travel between two events separated by a light-like distance.

The reason why only massless particles are able to travel between two events separated by a light-like distance is that it requires you to travel at exactly the speed of light. You can see this by considering the equation $t^2-x^2=0$, this means that $x=pm t$. These equations are with the units such that the speed of light $c=1$. Thus the particle taking this trajectory is travelling at the speed of light.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

LucashWindowWasherLucashWindowWasher

30311

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

1

$begingroup$

Only particles with zero mass can travel between two events which are separated by a light-like distance. The trajectory is called light-like because photons (light) are massless, and historically the first example of a massless particle, as well as the only example in the 1910's. There are other massless particles, like gluons which would also be able to travel between two events separated by a light-like distance.

The reason why only massless particles are able to travel between two events separated by a light-like distance is that it requires you to travel at exactly the speed of light. You can see this by considering the equation $t^2-x^2=0$, this means that $x=pm t$. These equations are with the units such that the speed of light $c=1$. Thus the particle taking this trajectory is travelling at the speed of light.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

LucashWindowWasherLucashWindowWasher

30311

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

Only particles with zero mass can travel between two events which are separated by a light-like distance. The trajectory is called light-like because photons (light) are massless, and historically the first example of a massless particle, as well as the only example in the 1910's. There are other massless particles, like gluons which would also be able to travel between two events separated by a light-like distance.

The reason why only massless particles are able to travel between two events separated by a light-like distance is that it requires you to travel at exactly the speed of light. You can see this by considering the equation $t^2-x^2=0$, this means that $x=pm t$. These equations are with the units such that the speed of light $c=1$. Thus the particle taking this trajectory is travelling at the speed of light.

share|cite|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

LucashWindowWasherLucashWindowWasher

30311

$endgroup$

share|cite|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

LucashWindowWasherLucashWindowWasher

30311

answered 1 hour ago

LucashWindowWasherLucashWindowWasher

30311

answered 1 hour ago

LucashWindowWasherLucashWindowWasher

30311