Talk:List of relativistic equations

message: This list as it stands is completely useless. Equations without explanations of their applicability and without even identifications of the involved variables are uttlerly without nutritional value. This needs to be fixed, or removed. AxelBoldt 02:21 Nov 15, 2002 (UTC)
It'll never get fixed if you remove it...Lir 02:22 Nov 15, 2002 (UTC)
Better nothing than this. AxelBoldt 03:25 Nov 15, 2002 (UTC)
Bah humbug Abramowitz and Stegun is my all-time favorite math book. Lists of formulas without explanation can be handy. Let the wikipedians fix this article. linas 02:56, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

message: Can anyone tell me what 'T' from the definitions is useful for? I've looked through my books and I can't see anything (equations or definitions) that mention this. 
Also if anyone can tell me how to alter equations to show them in a more visual format then I could make some of this a little easier to read. For instance putting a radical around something rather than putting it to the 1/2 power. 
I'll be working on this page to try and make it more readable and useful so don't go deleting it just yet.
thanks
Starfoxy 03:23, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The prior versions of this page had some errors and confusions, including the old 'T'. I've tried to straighten things out. The new 'T' is kinetic energy, which conforms to standard usage. For formatting, the TeX markup page Wikipedia: TeX markup may be helpful. So, are we going to do general relativistic equations too? Physicist 14:40, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  T? 

message: I just did a rewrite of this article to put a slightly longer list, and a long section on the derivation.  It still needs some work, particularly in putting in inline links to other articles where appropriate.  Also, it could be debated that the long derivation section should either be in another article or put in its own article. DAG 02:49, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrite Notes

message: Where time is placed is wrong, the usual way of placing it is t,x,y,z cause many matrixes get easier and looks betters. also in the distance formula u shouldrather use time as posetive and space as negative, cause its easier to remember that posetive dS^2 equals it to be spacelike
:It can be done that way, but it can also be done the other way.  It's a matter of convention, really.  Either works just as long as you stick to it.  It's mentioned in the article at the end of the section "The Metric and Four-Vectors".  DAG 21:24, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong Time 

message: But the Velocity Addition part is wrong.  Maybe someone could edit them with the correct equations, as well as replace the capital "V" for lower case "u".  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.233.41.11 (talk) 21:56, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I like the derivations, BUT 

message: I have added the essantial missing links and sources (and navbox).
More is to be done: this article is written far too much in the 1st and 2nd person, it shouldn't be (how corny does it sound to read "I, you" etc. ?). I intend to edit further at some point but too busy for now. --  F = q(E + v × B) 11:08, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Forgot to indicate there is a lot of overlap between this article (List of relativistic equations ) and the main article four-vector. If no one objects i'll merge it eventually. --  F = q(E + v × B) 11:10, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs fixing

message: What is the Lorentz transformation of the Electromagnetic tensor? Just granpa (talk) 04:57, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Electromagnetic tensor