Write electromagnetic field tensor in terms of four-vector potentialProof that 4-potential exists from Gauss-Faraday field equationHistory of Electromagnetic Field TensorElectromagnetic field tensor via tensor products?E&M and geometry - a historical perspectiveHow to properly construct the electromagnetic tensor in curved space-time?Can Gauss' and Ampere's Laws be written in terms of the divergence of an energy four-vector?Proof of Jacobi identity for electromagnetic field strength tensorcontravariant components of electromagnetic field tensor under lorentz transformationWhy is the electromagnetic field strength $F_munu=partial_nu A_mu-partial_mu A_nu$ a tensor?Electromagnetic field tensorDerivation of Covariant Maxwell's Equations
How should I push back against my job assigning "homework"?
Hiker's Cabin Mystery | Pt. IX
What are the benefits of cryosleep?
Modern approach to radio buttons
Beginner's snake game using PyGame
Is there an evolutionary advantage to having two heads?
Can a rogue effectively triple their speed by combining Dash and Ready?
Why is there a need to modify system call tables in linux?
What is the difference between nullifying your vote and not going to vote at all?
Intuition behind eigenvalues of an adjacency matrix
What caused the tendency for conservatives to not support climate change regulations?
Smart people send dumb people to a new planet on a space craft that crashes into a body of water
etoolbox: AtBeginEnvironment is not At Begin Environment
What does it mean when you think without speaking?
The deliberate use of misleading terminology
Why do Russians call their women expensive ("дорогая")?
SPI on stm32 won't work without pullup resistors and even then performs poorly
Where can I find the list of all tendons in the human body?
Term for checking piece whose opponent daren't capture it
How can I offer a test ride while selling a bike?
Why would Lupin kill Pettigrew?
Why does the UK have more political parties than the US?
Self-Preservation: How to DM NPCs that Love Living?
chmod would set file permission to 000 no matter what permission i try to set
Write electromagnetic field tensor in terms of four-vector potential
Proof that 4-potential exists from Gauss-Faraday field equationHistory of Electromagnetic Field TensorElectromagnetic field tensor via tensor products?E&M and geometry - a historical perspectiveHow to properly construct the electromagnetic tensor in curved space-time?Can Gauss' and Ampere's Laws be written in terms of the divergence of an energy four-vector?Proof of Jacobi identity for electromagnetic field strength tensorcontravariant components of electromagnetic field tensor under lorentz transformationWhy is the electromagnetic field strength $F_munu=partial_nu A_mu-partial_mu A_nu$ a tensor?Electromagnetic field tensorDerivation of Covariant Maxwell's Equations
$begingroup$
How can we know that the electromagnetic tensor $F_munu$ can be written in terms of a four-vector potential $A_mu$ as $F_mu nu = partial_mu A_nu - partial_nu A_mu$? In the vector calculus approach, this is not really hard to see (under reasonable 'smoothness' conditions on the fields), but I would like to know how one would see this in the four-vector approach.
More specifically, how can we prove (mathematically) that given the electromagnetic tensor, there exists a four-vector such that $F_munu = partial_mu A_nu - partial_nu A_mu$.
electromagnetism special-relativity differential-geometry tensor-calculus maxwell-equations
edited May 18 at 18:53
Qmechanic♦
109k122071276
asked May 15 at 21:00
Lucas L.Lucas L.
435
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
How can we know that the electromagnetic tensor $F_munu$ can be written in terms of a four-vector potential $A_mu$ as $F_mu nu = partial_mu A_nu - partial_nu A_mu$? In the vector calculus approach, this is not really hard to see (under reasonable 'smoothness' conditions on the fields), but I would like to know how one would see this in the four-vector approach.
More specifically, how can we prove (mathematically) that given the electromagnetic tensor, there exists a four-vector such that $F_munu = partial_mu A_nu - partial_nu A_mu$.
electromagnetism special-relativity differential-geometry tensor-calculus maxwell-equations
edited May 18 at 18:53
Qmechanic♦
109k122071276
asked May 15 at 21:00
Lucas L.Lucas L.
435
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
The EM field is actually a two-form $F$ satisfying Maxwell's equations, one of which is in form notation $dF = 0$. By definition this says that $F$ is a closed form. A form which is $F = dA$ for some $A$ is said exact. Now all exact forms are closed because $d^2 = 0$. On the other hand, Poincare's lemma says that all closed forms are exact if the domain is contractible. Assuming a contractible spacetime implies the existence of the potential from Poincare's lemma
$endgroup$
– user1620696
May 15 at 21:56
$begingroup$
This was what I was looking for. Thank you, I will look up Poincare's lemma.
$endgroup$
– Lucas L.
May 15 at 22:00
$begingroup$
@user1620696: $F=dA$ is exact $1$-form by definition. Otherwise you're spot on.
$endgroup$
– Cinaed Simson
May 17 at 8:20
add a comment |
$begingroup$
How can we know that the electromagnetic tensor $F_munu$ can be written in terms of a four-vector potential $A_mu$ as $F_mu nu = partial_mu A_nu - partial_nu A_mu$? In the vector calculus approach, this is not really hard to see (under reasonable 'smoothness' conditions on the fields), but I would like to know how one would see this in the four-vector approach.
More specifically, how can we prove (mathematically) that given the electromagnetic tensor, there exists a four-vector such that $F_munu = partial_mu A_nu - partial_nu A_mu$.
electromagnetism special-relativity differential-geometry tensor-calculus maxwell-equations
edited May 18 at 18:53
Qmechanic♦
109k122071276
asked May 15 at 21:00
Lucas L.Lucas L.
435
$endgroup$
How can we know that the electromagnetic tensor $F_munu$ can be written in terms of a four-vector potential $A_mu$ as $F_mu nu = partial_mu A_nu - partial_nu A_mu$? In the vector calculus approach, this is not really hard to see (under reasonable 'smoothness' conditions on the fields), but I would like to know how one would see this in the four-vector approach.
More specifically, how can we prove (mathematically) that given the electromagnetic tensor, there exists a four-vector such that $F_munu = partial_mu A_nu - partial_nu A_mu$.
electromagnetism special-relativity differential-geometry tensor-calculus maxwell-equations
electromagnetism special-relativity differential-geometry tensor-calculus maxwell-equations
edited May 18 at 18:53
Qmechanic♦
109k122071276
asked May 15 at 21:00
Lucas L.Lucas L.
435
edited May 18 at 18:53
Qmechanic♦
109k122071276
asked May 15 at 21:00
Lucas L.Lucas L.
435
edited May 18 at 18:53
Qmechanic♦
109k122071276
edited May 18 at 18:53
Qmechanic♦
109k122071276
edited May 18 at 18:53
Qmechanic♦
109k122071276
109k122071276
asked May 15 at 21:00
Lucas L.Lucas L.
435
asked May 15 at 21:00
Lucas L.Lucas L.
435
asked May 15 at 21:00
Lucas L.Lucas L.
435
435
1
$begingroup$
The EM field is actually a two-form $F$ satisfying Maxwell's equations, one of which is in form notation $dF = 0$. By definition this says that $F$ is a closed form. A form which is $F = dA$ for some $A$ is said exact. Now all exact forms are closed because $d^2 = 0$. On the other hand, Poincare's lemma says that all closed forms are exact if the domain is contractible. Assuming a contractible spacetime implies the existence of the potential from Poincare's lemma
$endgroup$
– user1620696
May 15 at 21:56
$begingroup$
This was what I was looking for. Thank you, I will look up Poincare's lemma.
$endgroup$
– Lucas L.
May 15 at 22:00
$begingroup$
@user1620696: $F=dA$ is exact $1$-form by definition. Otherwise you're spot on.
$endgroup$
– Cinaed Simson
May 17 at 8:20
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
The EM field is actually a two-form $F$ satisfying Maxwell's equations, one of which is in form notation $dF = 0$. By definition this says that $F$ is a closed form. A form which is $F = dA$ for some $A$ is said exact. Now all exact forms are closed because $d^2 = 0$. On the other hand, Poincare's lemma says that all closed forms are exact if the domain is contractible. Assuming a contractible spacetime implies the existence of the potential from Poincare's lemma
$endgroup$
– user1620696
May 15 at 21:56
$begingroup$
This was what I was looking for. Thank you, I will look up Poincare's lemma.
$endgroup$
– Lucas L.
May 15 at 22:00
$begingroup$
@user1620696: $F=dA$ is exact $1$-form by definition. Otherwise you're spot on.
$endgroup$
– Cinaed Simson
May 17 at 8:20
1
1
$begingroup$
The EM field is actually a two-form $F$ satisfying Maxwell's equations, one of which is in form notation $dF = 0$. By definition this says that $F$ is a closed form. A form which is $F = dA$ for some $A$ is said exact. Now all exact forms are closed because $d^2 = 0$. On the other hand, Poincare's lemma says that all closed forms are exact if the domain is contractible. Assuming a contractible spacetime implies the existence of the potential from Poincare's lemma
$endgroup$
– user1620696
May 15 at 21:56
$begingroup$
The EM field is actually a two-form $F$ satisfying Maxwell's equations, one of which is in form notation $dF = 0$. By definition this says that $F$ is a closed form. A form which is $F = dA$ for some $A$ is said exact. Now all exact forms are closed because $d^2 = 0$. On the other hand, Poincare's lemma says that all closed forms are exact if the domain is contractible. Assuming a contractible spacetime implies the existence of the potential from Poincare's lemma
$endgroup$
– user1620696
May 15 at 21:56
$begingroup$
This was what I was looking for. Thank you, I will look up Poincare's lemma.
$endgroup$
– Lucas L.
May 15 at 22:00
$begingroup$
This was what I was looking for. Thank you, I will look up Poincare's lemma.
$endgroup$
– Lucas L.
May 15 at 22:00
$begingroup$
@user1620696: $F=dA$ is exact $1$-form by definition. Otherwise you're spot on.
$endgroup$
– Cinaed Simson
May 17 at 8:20
$begingroup$
@user1620696: $F=dA$ is exact $1$-form by definition. Otherwise you're spot on.
$endgroup$
– Cinaed Simson
May 17 at 8:20
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The Bianchi identity $mathrmdF~=~0$ together with Poincare lemma guarantee the local existence of $A$ in contractible regions of spacetime. See also this related Phys.SE post.
answered May 15 at 21:58
Qmechanic♦Qmechanic
109k122071276
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
One way to write the homogenous Maxwell's equations is
with the Levi-Civita symbol $epsilon$:
$$epsilon^alphabetamunu partial_beta F_munu = 0$$
Solution to this is obviously (with arbitrary potential $A$):
$$F_munu = partial_mu A_nu - partial_nu A_mu$$
It is easy to verify using the antisymmetry of $epsilon^alphabetamunu$
upon swapping any 2 indexes, together with $partial_mupartial_nu = partial_nupartial_mu$.
answered May 15 at 21:55
Thomas FritschThomas Fritsch
3,06111323
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You are asking "how we know...". This may not be a fair question. We created this formalism. You could also ask how do we know that we can write Maxwell's equations using vectors. Long ago they were not, they were written as a large set of coupled scalar (scalar type) equations. The formalism of vector notation was still evolving and being accepted and one has to PROVE that a set of quantities actually behaves like a vector under coordinate transformations.
This is a key to understanding the 4-vector approach. There is a scalar E field potential, Phi, and a vector potential A, in classical electrodynamics.
Once Einstein presented Lorentz invariance in physics (I'm not going to write extensively about that history here) we started on the path of putting all equations in a covariant format. It is the nature of light that governs this invariance, and the postulate that the speed of light is the same for all relatively interital observers. Even Newton's laws of mechanics were elevated to a covariant 4-vector form, as was momentum (E, p) where Energy, E, was thought to be a scalar.
We know that electromagnetism needs to be Lorentz invariant and this motivates elevating Phi to the time component of a 4-vector, just like E is the time component of 4-momentum. This is also indicated by seeing how the equations transform under Lorentz. The 4-potential (Phi, A) must be as is to obey this symmetry. Then the rest follows.
answered May 15 at 21:48
ggcgggcg
1,822214
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I think you misinterpreted my question. I wanted to ask: how can we prove (mathematically) that given the electromagnetic tensor, there exists a four-vector such that $F^munu = partial^mu A^nu - partial^nu A^mu$. I will edit my question accordingly.
$endgroup$
– Lucas L.
May 15 at 21:55
$begingroup$
I think I did elude to it. Maxwell's equations will actually convert to the field tensor by collecting terms, using (Phi, A).
$endgroup$
– ggcg
May 15 at 22:01
$begingroup$
Okay, I am 180 degrees from your intent. Sorry. But it's the same logic as div(B) = 0 and curl(E) = 0. Namely that del(F) = 0 --> F has a potential. Of course you need to get the correct form of the equation, the source free version.
$endgroup$
– ggcg
May 15 at 22:03
add a comment |
Your Answer
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
);
);
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
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f480324%2fwrite-electromagnetic-field-tensor-in-terms-of-four-vector-potential%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The Bianchi identity $mathrmdF~=~0$ together with Poincare lemma guarantee the local existence of $A$ in contractible regions of spacetime. See also this related Phys.SE post.
answered May 15 at 21:58
Qmechanic♦Qmechanic
109k122071276
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The Bianchi identity $mathrmdF~=~0$ together with Poincare lemma guarantee the local existence of $A$ in contractible regions of spacetime. See also this related Phys.SE post.
answered May 15 at 21:58
Qmechanic♦Qmechanic
109k122071276
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The Bianchi identity $mathrmdF~=~0$ together with Poincare lemma guarantee the local existence of $A$ in contractible regions of spacetime. See also this related Phys.SE post.
answered May 15 at 21:58
Qmechanic♦Qmechanic
109k122071276
$endgroup$
The Bianchi identity $mathrmdF~=~0$ together with Poincare lemma guarantee the local existence of $A$ in contractible regions of spacetime. See also this related Phys.SE post.
answered May 15 at 21:58
Qmechanic♦Qmechanic
109k122071276
edited May 15 at 22:05
answered May 15 at 21:58
Qmechanic♦Qmechanic
109k122071276
answered May 15 at 21:58
Qmechanic♦Qmechanic
109k122071276
answered May 15 at 21:58
Qmechanic♦Qmechanic
109k122071276
109k122071276
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
One way to write the homogenous Maxwell's equations is
with the Levi-Civita symbol $epsilon$:
$$epsilon^alphabetamunu partial_beta F_munu = 0$$
Solution to this is obviously (with arbitrary potential $A$):
$$F_munu = partial_mu A_nu - partial_nu A_mu$$
It is easy to verify using the antisymmetry of $epsilon^alphabetamunu$
upon swapping any 2 indexes, together with $partial_mupartial_nu = partial_nupartial_mu$.
answered May 15 at 21:55
Thomas FritschThomas Fritsch
3,06111323
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
One way to write the homogenous Maxwell's equations is
with the Levi-Civita symbol $epsilon$:
$$epsilon^alphabetamunu partial_beta F_munu = 0$$
Solution to this is obviously (with arbitrary potential $A$):
$$F_munu = partial_mu A_nu - partial_nu A_mu$$
It is easy to verify using the antisymmetry of $epsilon^alphabetamunu$
upon swapping any 2 indexes, together with $partial_mupartial_nu = partial_nupartial_mu$.
answered May 15 at 21:55
Thomas FritschThomas Fritsch
3,06111323
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
One way to write the homogenous Maxwell's equations is
with the Levi-Civita symbol $epsilon$:
$$epsilon^alphabetamunu partial_beta F_munu = 0$$
Solution to this is obviously (with arbitrary potential $A$):
$$F_munu = partial_mu A_nu - partial_nu A_mu$$
It is easy to verify using the antisymmetry of $epsilon^alphabetamunu$
upon swapping any 2 indexes, together with $partial_mupartial_nu = partial_nupartial_mu$.
answered May 15 at 21:55
Thomas FritschThomas Fritsch
3,06111323
$endgroup$
One way to write the homogenous Maxwell's equations is
with the Levi-Civita symbol $epsilon$:
$$epsilon^alphabetamunu partial_beta F_munu = 0$$
Solution to this is obviously (with arbitrary potential $A$):
$$F_munu = partial_mu A_nu - partial_nu A_mu$$
It is easy to verify using the antisymmetry of $epsilon^alphabetamunu$
upon swapping any 2 indexes, together with $partial_mupartial_nu = partial_nupartial_mu$.
answered May 15 at 21:55
Thomas FritschThomas Fritsch
3,06111323
edited May 15 at 22:59
answered May 15 at 21:55
Thomas FritschThomas Fritsch
3,06111323
answered May 15 at 21:55
Thomas FritschThomas Fritsch
3,06111323
answered May 15 at 21:55
Thomas FritschThomas Fritsch
3,06111323
3,06111323
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You are asking "how we know...". This may not be a fair question. We created this formalism. You could also ask how do we know that we can write Maxwell's equations using vectors. Long ago they were not, they were written as a large set of coupled scalar (scalar type) equations. The formalism of vector notation was still evolving and being accepted and one has to PROVE that a set of quantities actually behaves like a vector under coordinate transformations.
This is a key to understanding the 4-vector approach. There is a scalar E field potential, Phi, and a vector potential A, in classical electrodynamics.
Once Einstein presented Lorentz invariance in physics (I'm not going to write extensively about that history here) we started on the path of putting all equations in a covariant format. It is the nature of light that governs this invariance, and the postulate that the speed of light is the same for all relatively interital observers. Even Newton's laws of mechanics were elevated to a covariant 4-vector form, as was momentum (E, p) where Energy, E, was thought to be a scalar.
We know that electromagnetism needs to be Lorentz invariant and this motivates elevating Phi to the time component of a 4-vector, just like E is the time component of 4-momentum. This is also indicated by seeing how the equations transform under Lorentz. The 4-potential (Phi, A) must be as is to obey this symmetry. Then the rest follows.
answered May 15 at 21:48
ggcgggcg
1,822214
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I think you misinterpreted my question. I wanted to ask: how can we prove (mathematically) that given the electromagnetic tensor, there exists a four-vector such that $F^munu = partial^mu A^nu - partial^nu A^mu$. I will edit my question accordingly.
$endgroup$
– Lucas L.
May 15 at 21:55
$begingroup$
I think I did elude to it. Maxwell's equations will actually convert to the field tensor by collecting terms, using (Phi, A).
$endgroup$
– ggcg
May 15 at 22:01
$begingroup$
Okay, I am 180 degrees from your intent. Sorry. But it's the same logic as div(B) = 0 and curl(E) = 0. Namely that del(F) = 0 --> F has a potential. Of course you need to get the correct form of the equation, the source free version.
$endgroup$
– ggcg
May 15 at 22:03
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You are asking "how we know...". This may not be a fair question. We created this formalism. You could also ask how do we know that we can write Maxwell's equations using vectors. Long ago they were not, they were written as a large set of coupled scalar (scalar type) equations. The formalism of vector notation was still evolving and being accepted and one has to PROVE that a set of quantities actually behaves like a vector under coordinate transformations.
This is a key to understanding the 4-vector approach. There is a scalar E field potential, Phi, and a vector potential A, in classical electrodynamics.
Once Einstein presented Lorentz invariance in physics (I'm not going to write extensively about that history here) we started on the path of putting all equations in a covariant format. It is the nature of light that governs this invariance, and the postulate that the speed of light is the same for all relatively interital observers. Even Newton's laws of mechanics were elevated to a covariant 4-vector form, as was momentum (E, p) where Energy, E, was thought to be a scalar.
We know that electromagnetism needs to be Lorentz invariant and this motivates elevating Phi to the time component of a 4-vector, just like E is the time component of 4-momentum. This is also indicated by seeing how the equations transform under Lorentz. The 4-potential (Phi, A) must be as is to obey this symmetry. Then the rest follows.
answered May 15 at 21:48
ggcgggcg
1,822214
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I think you misinterpreted my question. I wanted to ask: how can we prove (mathematically) that given the electromagnetic tensor, there exists a four-vector such that $F^munu = partial^mu A^nu - partial^nu A^mu$. I will edit my question accordingly.
$endgroup$
– Lucas L.
May 15 at 21:55
$begingroup$
I think I did elude to it. Maxwell's equations will actually convert to the field tensor by collecting terms, using (Phi, A).
$endgroup$
– ggcg
May 15 at 22:01
$begingroup$
Okay, I am 180 degrees from your intent. Sorry. But it's the same logic as div(B) = 0 and curl(E) = 0. Namely that del(F) = 0 --> F has a potential. Of course you need to get the correct form of the equation, the source free version.
$endgroup$
– ggcg
May 15 at 22:03
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You are asking "how we know...". This may not be a fair question. We created this formalism. You could also ask how do we know that we can write Maxwell's equations using vectors. Long ago they were not, they were written as a large set of coupled scalar (scalar type) equations. The formalism of vector notation was still evolving and being accepted and one has to PROVE that a set of quantities actually behaves like a vector under coordinate transformations.
This is a key to understanding the 4-vector approach. There is a scalar E field potential, Phi, and a vector potential A, in classical electrodynamics.
Once Einstein presented Lorentz invariance in physics (I'm not going to write extensively about that history here) we started on the path of putting all equations in a covariant format. It is the nature of light that governs this invariance, and the postulate that the speed of light is the same for all relatively interital observers. Even Newton's laws of mechanics were elevated to a covariant 4-vector form, as was momentum (E, p) where Energy, E, was thought to be a scalar.
We know that electromagnetism needs to be Lorentz invariant and this motivates elevating Phi to the time component of a 4-vector, just like E is the time component of 4-momentum. This is also indicated by seeing how the equations transform under Lorentz. The 4-potential (Phi, A) must be as is to obey this symmetry. Then the rest follows.
answered May 15 at 21:48
ggcgggcg
1,822214
$endgroup$
You are asking "how we know...". This may not be a fair question. We created this formalism. You could also ask how do we know that we can write Maxwell's equations using vectors. Long ago they were not, they were written as a large set of coupled scalar (scalar type) equations. The formalism of vector notation was still evolving and being accepted and one has to PROVE that a set of quantities actually behaves like a vector under coordinate transformations.
This is a key to understanding the 4-vector approach. There is a scalar E field potential, Phi, and a vector potential A, in classical electrodynamics.
Once Einstein presented Lorentz invariance in physics (I'm not going to write extensively about that history here) we started on the path of putting all equations in a covariant format. It is the nature of light that governs this invariance, and the postulate that the speed of light is the same for all relatively interital observers. Even Newton's laws of mechanics were elevated to a covariant 4-vector form, as was momentum (E, p) where Energy, E, was thought to be a scalar.
We know that electromagnetism needs to be Lorentz invariant and this motivates elevating Phi to the time component of a 4-vector, just like E is the time component of 4-momentum. This is also indicated by seeing how the equations transform under Lorentz. The 4-potential (Phi, A) must be as is to obey this symmetry. Then the rest follows.
answered May 15 at 21:48
ggcgggcg
1,822214
answered May 15 at 21:48
ggcgggcg
1,822214
answered May 15 at 21:48
ggcgggcg
1,822214
answered May 15 at 21:48
ggcgggcg
1,822214
1,822214
$begingroup$
I think you misinterpreted my question. I wanted to ask: how can we prove (mathematically) that given the electromagnetic tensor, there exists a four-vector such that $F^munu = partial^mu A^nu - partial^nu A^mu$. I will edit my question accordingly.
$endgroup$
– Lucas L.
May 15 at 21:55
$begingroup$
I think I did elude to it. Maxwell's equations will actually convert to the field tensor by collecting terms, using (Phi, A).
$endgroup$
– ggcg
May 15 at 22:01
$begingroup$
Okay, I am 180 degrees from your intent. Sorry. But it's the same logic as div(B) = 0 and curl(E) = 0. Namely that del(F) = 0 --> F has a potential. Of course you need to get the correct form of the equation, the source free version.
$endgroup$
– ggcg
May 15 at 22:03
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I think you misinterpreted my question. I wanted to ask: how can we prove (mathematically) that given the electromagnetic tensor, there exists a four-vector such that $F^munu = partial^mu A^nu - partial^nu A^mu$. I will edit my question accordingly.
$endgroup$
– Lucas L.
May 15 at 21:55
$begingroup$
I think I did elude to it. Maxwell's equations will actually convert to the field tensor by collecting terms, using (Phi, A).
$endgroup$
– ggcg
May 15 at 22:01
$begingroup$
Okay, I am 180 degrees from your intent. Sorry. But it's the same logic as div(B) = 0 and curl(E) = 0. Namely that del(F) = 0 --> F has a potential. Of course you need to get the correct form of the equation, the source free version.
$endgroup$
– ggcg
May 15 at 22:03
$begingroup$
I think you misinterpreted my question. I wanted to ask: how can we prove (mathematically) that given the electromagnetic tensor, there exists a four-vector such that $F^munu = partial^mu A^nu - partial^nu A^mu$. I will edit my question accordingly.
$endgroup$
– Lucas L.
May 15 at 21:55
$begingroup$
I think you misinterpreted my question. I wanted to ask: how can we prove (mathematically) that given the electromagnetic tensor, there exists a four-vector such that $F^munu = partial^mu A^nu - partial^nu A^mu$. I will edit my question accordingly.
$endgroup$
– Lucas L.
May 15 at 21:55
$begingroup$
I think I did elude to it. Maxwell's equations will actually convert to the field tensor by collecting terms, using (Phi, A).
$endgroup$
– ggcg
May 15 at 22:01
$begingroup$
I think I did elude to it. Maxwell's equations will actually convert to the field tensor by collecting terms, using (Phi, A).
$endgroup$
– ggcg
May 15 at 22:01
$begingroup$
Okay, I am 180 degrees from your intent. Sorry. But it's the same logic as div(B) = 0 and curl(E) = 0. Namely that del(F) = 0 --> F has a potential. Of course you need to get the correct form of the equation, the source free version.
$endgroup$
– ggcg
May 15 at 22:03
$begingroup$
Okay, I am 180 degrees from your intent. Sorry. But it's the same logic as div(B) = 0 and curl(E) = 0. Namely that del(F) = 0 --> F has a potential. Of course you need to get the correct form of the equation, the source free version.
$endgroup$
– ggcg
May 15 at 22:03
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
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
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f480324%2fwrite-electromagnetic-field-tensor-in-terms-of-four-vector-potential%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
Required, but never shown
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
Required, but never shown
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
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
$begingroup$
The EM field is actually a two-form $F$ satisfying Maxwell's equations, one of which is in form notation $dF = 0$. By definition this says that $F$ is a closed form. A form which is $F = dA$ for some $A$ is said exact. Now all exact forms are closed because $d^2 = 0$. On the other hand, Poincare's lemma says that all closed forms are exact if the domain is contractible. Assuming a contractible spacetime implies the existence of the potential from Poincare's lemma
$endgroup$
– user1620696
May 15 at 21:56
$begingroup$
This was what I was looking for. Thank you, I will look up Poincare's lemma.
$endgroup$
– Lucas L.
May 15 at 22:00
$begingroup$
@user1620696: $F=dA$ is exact $1$-form by definition. Otherwise you're spot on.
$endgroup$
– Cinaed Simson
May 17 at 8:20