Abstract definition of electromagnetic fields on manifolds

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the abstract definition of electromagnetic fields on manifolds, specifically focusing on the electric field's representation in the context of an orientable Lorentz manifold. The electric field is expressed through an integral involving charge density, as noted in John David Jackson's "Classical Electrodynamics" (2012). Participants emphasize that the electric field is a component of the electromagnetic field tensor, defined as \(F_{\mu\nu} = \partial_\mu A_\nu - \partial_\nu A_\mu\). The conversation highlights the complexities of defining charge density and volume forms in varying coordinate systems, ultimately suggesting that defining the electromagnetic field tensor via the vector potential may be more fruitful.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of differential geometry concepts
  • Familiarity with Maxwell's equations
  • Knowledge of the electromagnetic field tensor \(F^{\mu\nu}\)
  • Basic principles of Lorentz manifolds
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the application of the Whitney embedding theorem in electromagnetism
  • Study the derivation of the electromagnetic field tensor from the vector potential
  • Explore the implications of charge density as a component of a 4-vector
  • Investigate the integration of charge and current densities over past light-cones
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, mathematicians specializing in differential geometry, and researchers focused on the intersection of electromagnetism and general relativity.

ZuperPosition
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Hello,
In the sources I have looked into (textbooks and articles on differential geometry), I have not found any abstract definition of the electromagnetic fields. It seems that at most the electric field is defined as
$$\bf{E}(t,\bf{x}) = \frac{1}{4\pi \epsilon_0} \int \rho(t,\bf{x}') \frac{\bf{x}-\bf{x}'}{|\bf{x}-\bf{x}'|^3} d^3 x'$$
as seen in e.g. (John David Jackson, Classical electrodynamics, John Wiley & Sons, 2012). I want to make a similar definition of the Electric field for an orientable Lorentz manifold. There are some issues that come to mind. The most obvious is that position is not well-defined on an abstract manifold. Secondly, if we for example model space-time as ##\mathbb{R}\times S^2##, with the first factor representing time and ##S^2## is the spatial part, the nominator ##\bf{x}-\bf{x}'## in the integral should be projected to the part that is tangent to ##S^2##. This is the case as otherwise the electric field would not be a vector field. Though, this is not really representative of manifolds in full generality, the manifold as a set need not be a subset of a vector field. I am aware that the Whitney embedding theorem might be applicable here which could prove useful. But for various reasons I can not use the Whitney embedding theorem, sadly.

My goal is to later define the electromagnetic field tensor on (a kind of generalised) manifolds. How to define the charge density, and volume form is obvious, but I don't see how the rest could be done in such an abstract manner. Has it even ever been done? If so, could someone please enlighten me?

Regards
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ZuperPosition said:
It seems that at most the electric field is defined as
This is not the definition of the electric field. It is an expression for the electric field given some source density ##\rho##. It seems more to me as if you want to solve Maxwell's equations in a general manifold. The expression for this is going to be dependent on the particular manifold, but in general the field should depend on the charge and current densities on the past light-cone. Also, the electric field is just a part of the electromagnetic field tensor ##F^{\mu\nu}##, what you really want to do is to find that. Its definition is exactly the same as that in special relativity, ##F_{\mu\nu} = \partial_\mu A_\nu - \partial_\nu A_\mu##. Note that you do not need to replace the partial derivatives here with covariant derivatives.

ZuperPosition said:
How to define the charge density, and volume form is obvious
It should not be. Charge density is a component of a 4-vector and depends on the coordinate system. What "volume" means also depends on the coordinate system, i.e., which spatial surface you integrate over. The "obvious" things are the 4-current density and the spacetime volume form.

Edit: Also, your proposed spacetime ##\mathbb R \times S^2## only has 3 dimensions. Your electric field with have two components and your magnetic field will have one.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ZuperPosition and Klystron
Orodruin said:
This is not the definition of the electric field. It is an expression for the electric field given some source density ##\rho##. It seems more to me as if you want to solve Maxwell's equations in a general manifold. The expression for this is going to be dependent on the particular manifold, but in general the field should depend on the charge and current densities on the past light-cone. Also, the electric field is just a part of the electromagnetic field tensor ##F^{\mu\nu}##, what you really want to do is to find that. Its definition is exactly the same as that in special relativity, ##F_{\mu\nu} = \partial_\mu A_\nu - \partial_\nu A_\mu##. Note that you do not need to replace the partial derivatives here with covariant derivatives.It should not be. Charge density is a component of a 4-vector and depends on the coordinate system. What "volume" means also depends on the coordinate system, i.e., which spatial surface you integrate over. The "obvious" things are the 4-current density and the spacetime volume form.

Edit: Also, your proposed spacetime ##\mathbb R \times S^2## only has 3 dimensions. Your electric field with have two components and your magnetic field will have one.

Ah yes, you are right it might be much more fruitful to define the electromagnetic field tensor using the vector potential. I got a bit distracted as some of the literature seems to want to define the electromagnetic fields on Minkowski space before defining the electromagnetic field tensor. In general, each component of ##A_\mu## is usually computed with a similar integral as above, right? Is there a way to express the 4-potential on a Lorentz manifold in general or is any such endeavour not really feasible?

You are also correct about the charge density, my bad.

Yes, having ##\mathbb{R} \times S^2## as spacetime is a bit weird dimensionally, but it is intentional. :)

Thank you!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K