1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Could someone please explain this 4-vector/tensor notation?

  1. Mar 1, 2009 #1
    If you can answer any of the questions below, your help will be greatly appreciated.

    There's an equation from E&M (I believe the definition of the antisymmetric field tensor) that reads:

    [tex]
    F_{\mu \nu} = \frac{\partial A_\nu}{\partial x^\mu} - \frac{\partial A_\mu}{\partial x^\nu},
    [/tex]

    where (of course) [itex]A[/itex] is the 4-vector potential. I have no idea how to parse this equation...what's going on with taking the partial of [itex]A_\nu[/itex] with respect to [itex]x^\mu[/itex]? What's this notation describing, or telling me to do? I just don't see it.

    Also (and this pertains to relativistic quantum mechanics), what's meant by something like

    [tex]
    \partial_\mu [\partial_\nu \Psi(x^\mu)],
    [/tex]

    where (of course) [itex]\Psi(x^\mu)[/itex] is the wave function? I.e., what does it mean to operate on [itex]\partial_\nu[/itex] of something with [itex]\partial_\mu[/itex]? Particularly when that something I'm operating on is a function of [itex]x^\mu[/itex]? (By the way: In case the notation is unfamiliar to you, [itex]\partial^\mu = \partial / \partial x_\mu[/itex].) Does that turn into something? Can I compactify that? Or do I just have to leave it as [itex]\partial_\mu [\partial_\nu \Psi(x^\mu)][/itex]? Also, would I get an equivalent expression if I interchanged the order of [itex]\partial_\mu[/itex] and [itex]\partial_\nu[/itex]; i.e., if I tried to evaluate [itex]\partial_\nu [\partial_\mu \Psi(x^\mu)][/itex]? Or would I get something quite different?

    Does all of this boil down to "we need two distinct dummy indices, [itex]\mu[/itex] and [itex]\nu[/itex], to indicate that there shouldn't be any summation going on?"

    (P.S. - I would like to thank David J. Griffiths for getting me into the habit of italicizing words I want to emphasize.)
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 1, 2009 #2
    Given two four vectors, one for the field, and one for the spacetime
    position

    [tex]
    \vec{A} = (A_0, -A_1, -A_2, -A_3)
    [/tex]
    [tex]
    \vec{x} = (x^0, x^1, x^2, x^3) = (ct, x, y, z)
    [/tex]

    This says that there's 16 scalar quantities that can be calculated by
    taking derivatives. Two examples are:

    [tex]
    F_{23} =
    \frac{\partial A_3}{\partial x^2} - \frac{\partial A_2}{\partial x^3} =
    \frac{\partial A_3}{\partial y} - \frac{\partial A_2}{\partial z}
    [/tex]

    [tex]
    F_{33} =
    \frac{\partial A_3}{\partial x^3} - \frac{\partial A_3}{\partial x^3} = 0
    [/tex]

    For your other question, I'd assume summation over [itex]\mu[/itex] is implied.
     
  4. Mar 1, 2009 #3
    Thanks a lot for your help!

    What if I confront something like

    [tex]
    \frac{\partial F^{\mu \nu}}{\partial x^\nu} = \partial_\nu F^{\mu \nu}?
    [/tex]

    Does that imply a sum over [itex]\nu[/itex]?
     
  5. Mar 1, 2009 #4

    nicksauce

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Yes, if an index is repeated as an upper index and a lower index, it implies a sum over that index.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Could someone please explain this 4-vector/tensor notation?
Loading...