Covariant macroscopic electromagnetism

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the search for a comprehensive online reference for the covariant formulation of Maxwell's macroscopic equations and classical electromagnetism. Participants express dissatisfaction with the Wikipedia article's treatment of constitutive equations, particularly in vacuum, and seek a more systematic approach. Recommendations include Jack Vanderlinde's book and various papers by Fred Hehl, which delve into premetric formulations and covariant nonlinear optics. The conversation highlights the complexity of covariant constitutive relations, emphasizing the relationship between electric and magnetic fields even in vacuum scenarios. Overall, the thread underscores the need for clearer resources on advanced topics in covariant electromagnetism.
Messages
36,602
Reaction score
15,418
I wondered if anyone had a good online reference on the covariant formulation of Maxwell's macroscopic equations and the other equations of classical electromagnetism?

The wikipedia article talks about constituitive equations in vacuum, which doesn't make a lot of sense to me since M and P are 0 by definition.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I had the same problem but I couldn't find the answer in online sources.
I only can suggest you "Classical electromagnetic theory" by Jack Vanderlinde.
 
Which Wikipedia article?
 
Hm, but it's given just in the next section of the Wikipedia article, referring to Minkowski's model for the linear-response consitutive relations.
 
Yes, but I don't want to assume linear constitutive relationships. The Wikipedia treatment is also just too disjointed for me to follow well. I am looking for a more systematic and general covariant presentation.
 
OK, this is from the book I mentioned:
H_{\mu \nu} is the anti-symmetric tensor containing H and D fields. It has the same dimensions as the H field and the D and H components located in it and what are their signs can be derived by analogy with F_{\mu \nu}.
P_{\mu \nu} is the anti-symmetric tensor containing M and P fields. It has the same dimensions as the M field and, again, where the D and H components located in it and what are their signs can be derived by analogy with F_{\mu \nu}.
Now we have the equations below:
<br /> H_{\mu\nu}=\varepsilon_0c^2F_{\mu\nu}+P_{\mu\nu}<br />
<br /> \partial_\mu H^{\mu\nu}=J^\nu<br />
EDIT: Looks like the Wikipedia page contains the things I wrote in this post. So what else do you need DaleSpam?
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
  • #10
DaleSpam said:
The wikipedia article talks about constituitive equations in vacuum, which doesn't make a lot of sense to me since M and P are 0 by definition.

The covariant constitutive equation relates E with D and B with H, even in the vacuum case (e.g., \vec D=\epsilon_0 \vec E).

From a more abstract viewpoint, that example is actually more than a proportionality relation between two vector fields. The vector E is the metric-dual of a one-form, and (in (3+1)-dimensions) the vector D is the metric-dual of the Hodge-dual of a twisted two-form. (The latter is similar to how a cross-product of two vectors in 3D can be thought of as a [pseudo-]vector.)
 
  • #11
robphy said:
Check out various works by Fred Hehl:
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/9907046
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0005084
http://arxiv.org/abs/0807.4249
arxiv.org/find/physics/1/au:+Hehl_F/0/1/0/all/0/1
...and his references.

Do a google search for these three:
  • van dantzig electromagnetism
  • post electromagnetics
  • ingarden jamiolkowski electrodynamics
(I am interested in premetric formulations.)
Thanks. I am still going through these.

Hehl's "gentle introduction" paper made an interesting comment that I had never considered. After introducing equation 8.2 he says "there is no physical exchange between the bound and the external charges". Since each is separately conserved he is correct, but I guess that means that this approach cannot model something like dielectric breakdown where the bound charge becomes so strong that it turns into a free current.
 
  • #12
A covariant definition of the polarization-magnetization 2-form P is
dP=*j
where j is the charge-current form for the microscopic charges in the medium and * is the dual.
Obviously P is defined only up to the differential dA of a 1-form C as ddC=0. In optics one usually choses C so as to make magnetization vanish while in static situations this leads to a divergenge as ω→0.
Note the close analogy to the definition of the vector potential A in terms of the electromagentic field strength
dA=E
where A is also defined only up to a total derivative df of a gauge function f.
Macroscopic equations are obtained by considering the components of P with low wavenumber.
Covariant constituitive relations are obtained when the induced charge-current density j due to E is calculated covariantly.
 

Similar threads

Replies
48
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
609
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
5K
Replies
10
Views
4K