About the derivation of Lorentz gauge condition

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of the Lorentz gauge condition, specifically the expression ∂µAµ = 0 being equivalent to d∗A = 0, where A represents the four-potential and involves concepts from differential geometry.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between the Lorentz condition and the Hodge star operator, questioning the sign difference in the expressions. There is also a focus on the notation and the implications of indices in the context of the four-potential.

Discussion Status

The discussion includes attempts to clarify the equivalence of the two expressions and addresses potential misunderstandings regarding notation. Some participants express gratitude for corrections, indicating a collaborative effort to refine understanding.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of a possible error in terminology regarding the name of the gauge condition, which may affect the clarity of the discussion.

QuantumRose
Messages
11
Reaction score
1
The question:
Show that the Lorentz condition ∂µAµ =0 is expressed as d∗ A =0.
Where A is the four-potential and * is the Hodge star, d is the exterior differentiation.


In four-dimensional space, we know that the Hodge star of one-forms are the followings.
0c95a67c2cdabbfc965b8475ec01a96f4bce3af9


3. My attempt
Since the four potential one-form is
png.png

Therefore we have
png.png

Then d*A = 0 is equivalent of saying
png.png
(Where
png.png
)

However, the actual Lorentz gauge potential is
png.png
(Where
png.png
)

I don't know why there is a sign difference?
 

Attachments

  • png.png
    png.png
    841 bytes · Views: 588
  • png.png
    png.png
    3.6 KB · Views: 820
  • png.png
    png.png
    565 bytes · Views: 631
  • png.png
    png.png
    569 bytes · Views: 674
  • png.png
    png.png
    569 bytes · Views: 1,037
  • png.png
    png.png
    569 bytes · Views: 1,045
Physics news on Phys.org
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: QuantumRose
George Jones said:
Aren't the indices "upstairs", here?
Opps, such a silly mistake... thank you!
 
The correct name is Lorenz, not Lorentz. Please, tell that to your instructor, too.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K