6-dimensional representation of Lorentz group

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the representation of the Lorentz group in the context of electromagnetic fields, specifically exploring the idea of constructing a 6-dimensional vector from the electric and magnetic field components. Participants examine whether this vector can transform under the Lorentz group in a manner analogous to 4-vectors and discuss the implications of using the Faraday tensor.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that a 6-component vector formed from the electric and magnetic fields could transform under a 6-dimensional representation of the Lorentz group.
  • Others argue that the correct relativistic object for the electric and magnetic fields is the Faraday tensor, which is a rank 2 tensor in 4D spacetime with 16 components, but only 6 independent components due to its antisymmetry.
  • A later reply questions the validity of the 6-component vector as a true vector in relativity, stating that a vector must have 4 components.
  • Some participants clarify that while the 6-component object is not a vector in the traditional sense, it belongs to a 6-dimensional vector space of antisymmetric rank two tensors that can represent the Lorentz group.
  • There is a discussion about the transformation properties of the Faraday tensor and its relationship to the Lorentz group, with some asserting that it indeed transforms according to a 6-dimensional representation.
  • Concerns are raised about the relevance of n-dimensional representations of the Lorentz group, particularly if they are typically associated with n=4.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the nature of the 6-component vector and its classification within the framework of relativity. While some acknowledge the transformation properties of the Faraday tensor, there is no consensus on the validity or utility of a 6-dimensional vector representation.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in the definitions and assumptions regarding vector and tensor representations in relativity, particularly concerning the transformation properties and dimensionality of these mathematical objects.

Silviu
Messages
612
Reaction score
11
Hello! I understand that the vector formed of the scalar and vector potential in classical EM behaves like a 4-vector (##A^\nu=\Lambda^\nu_\mu A^\mu##). Does this means that the if we make a vector with the 3 components of B field and 3 of E field, so a 6 components vector V, will it transform as ##V^\nu=M(\Lambda^\nu_\mu) V^\mu##, with M being a 6-dimensional representation of the Lorentz group? So can we build all the tensorial formalism of EM using this 6-dimensional representation, in the same way we did with a 4-vector representation?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Silviu said:
). Does this means that the if we make a vector with the 3 components of B field and 3 of E field, so a 6 components vector V, will it transform as Vν=M(Λνμ)VμVν=M(Λμν)VμV^\nu=M(\Lambda^\nu_\mu) V^\mu,
Not quite. The relativistic object which contains the components of both the non relativistic E and B field is called the Faraday tensor. It is a rank 2 tensor in 4D spacetime, so it has 16 components. But the Faraday tensor is antisymmetric, so it only has 6 independent components (the diagonal elements are 0 and the upper triangle is the opposite of the lower triangle)
 
Dale said:
Not quite. The relativistic object which contains the components of both the non relativistic E and B field is called the Faraday tensor. It is a rank 2 tensor in 4D spacetime, so it has 16 components. But the Faraday tensor is antisymmetric, so it only has 6 independent components (the diagonal elements are 0 and the upper triangle is the opposite of the lower triangle)
So the vector I just described, doesn't transform in a relativistic from, it must be through a tensor?
 
Silviu said:
So the vector I just described, doesn't transform in a relativistic from, it must be through a tensor?
Well, technically what you described is not even a vector. A vector has 4 components in relativity, so something with 6 components cannot be a vector.
 
Dale said:
Well, technically what you described is not even a vector. A vector has 4 components in relativity, so something with 6 components cannot be a vector.
Oh, so what is the point of a n-dimensional representation of the Lorentz group, if it makes sense only for n=4?
 
There are two convenient ways to get the transformation of the electromagnetic-field components. First you can use the Faraday tensor components,
$$F_{\mu \nu}=\partial_{\mu} A_{\nu} - \partial_{\nu} A_{\mu},$$
which transform as any 2nd-rank-tensor components
$$\bar{F}^{\mu \nu}(\bar{x}) = {\Lambda^{\mu}}_{\rho} {\Lambda^{\nu}}_{\sigma} F^{\rho \sigma}(x).$$
The second posibility is to use the Riemann-Silberstein vector. In terms of the field components in the 1+3-formalism it reads
$$\vec{F}=\vec{E}+\mathrm{i} \vec{B}.$$
The two invariants one can form from the ##F_{\mu \nu}## are ##F_{\mu \nu} F^{\mu \nu}## and ##\epsilon_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma} F^{\mu \nu} F^{\rho \sigma}##, which are proportional to ##\vec{E}^2-\vec{B}^2## and ##\vec{E} \cdot \vec{B}##. Now using the usual scalar product for the complex RS vector, shows that under Lorentz transformations the scalar product
$$\vec{F} \cdot \vec{F} = (\vec{E}^2-\vec{B}^2) +2 \mathrm{i} \vec{E} \cdot \vec{B}$$
stays constant. Thus the representation of the proper orthochronous Lorentz group for the RS vector is ##\mathrm{SO}(3,\mathbb{C})##. It turns out that the subgroup ##\mathrm{SO}(3,\mathbb{R})## is the representation of the rotations as it must be since ##\vec{E}## and ##\vec{B}## are real three-vectors. Rotations around a fixed direction with imaginary angles, represent the boosts in the corresponding direction. They mix electric and magnetic components.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dextercioby
Dale said:
Not quite. The relativistic object which contains the components of both the non relativistic E and B field is called the Faraday tensor. It is a rank 2 tensor in 4D spacetime, so it has 16 components. But the Faraday tensor is antisymmetric, so it only has 6 independent components (the diagonal elements are 0 and the upper triangle is the opposite of the lower triangle)

The set of anti-symmetric rank two tensors form a 6-dimensional vector space so: Yes, indeed the Faraday tensor transforms according to a 6-dimensional representation of the Lorentz group.

Dale said:
Well, technically what you described is not even a vector. A vector has 4 components in relativity, so something with 6 components cannot be a vector.
It is not a vector in the typical nomenclature of relativity, but it is an element of a 6-dimensional vector space (the anti-symmetric rank two tensors) that allows a representation of the Lorentz group.

I would not use the regular space-time indices to denote the components of this vector space though.

Silviu said:
Oh, so what is the point of a n-dimensional representation of the Lorentz group, if it makes sense only for n=4?
The Faraday tensor indeed transforms under a 6-dimensional representation of the Lorentz group.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeterDonis

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 124 ·
5
Replies
124
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K