A B and A in Curved Space Time: Does \nabla \times A =B?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on whether the relation \nabla \times A = B holds in curved spacetime, specifically within a spatially flat Friedmann-Robertson-Walker background. It highlights that while curl exists in three-dimensional Euclidean space, a generalization using the exterior derivative is necessary in four-dimensional spacetimes. The electromagnetic field tensor F, which combines electric and magnetic fields, can be expressed as F = dA, where A is the four-potential. There is uncertainty about the applicability of this relation in curved space, with references to covariant expressions of Maxwell's equations suggesting they may retain the same form. The conversation reflects ongoing efforts to develop a deeper understanding of these concepts in general relativity.
yourWitten
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
By definition of the vector potential we may write

\nabla \times A =B

at least in flat space. Does this relation hold in curved space? I am particularly interested if we can still write this in a spatially flat Friedmann-Robertson-Walker background with metric ds^2=dt^2-a^2(dx^2+dy^2+dz^2) and if not, how it should be modified.

I know this question is extremely simple but I'm still developing intuition on GR.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Curl as such only exists in 3-dimensional Euclidean space. You need to look at a generalisation in the 4d case of both flat and curved spacetimes, namely the exterior derivative. In relativity, both the electric and magnetic fields together form a second rank tensor F called the electromagnetic field tensor. This in turn can be written in terms of the exterior derivative as F=dA where A is the 4-potential containing both the electric scalar and the magnetic vector porential. Of course, what is what (electric/magnetic) depends on the reference frame.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and PeroK
yourWitten said:
@Orodruin I am familiar with the covariant expressions of Maxwell's equations but having trouble working this out. In particular http://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/bitstream/handle/10915/125010/Documento_completo.pdf-PDFA.pdf?sequence=1 Eq. 2.24 suggests that the formula remains the same, but I don't see why.
Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't this simply because the Maxwell equations in general covariant form are the same as the equations in flat spacetime because the torsion vanishes? If they retain the same form, the expressions for B and E in terms of the gauge field don't change either.
 
Hello, everyone, hope someone will resolve my doubts. I have posted here some two years ago asking for an explanation of the Lorentz transforms derivation found in the Einstein 1905 paper. The answer I got seemed quite satisfactory. Two years after I revisit this derivation and this is what I see. In the Einstein original paper, the Lorentz transforms derivation included as a premise that light is always propagated along the direction perpendicular to the line of motion when viewed from the...