Does the Lorentz Condition Apply to the Given Vector Field Lagrangian?

orentago
Messages
27
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Given the Lagrangian density

L=-{1 \over 2}[\partial_\alpha\phi_\beta(x)][\partial^\alpha\phi^\beta(x)]+{1\over 2}[\partial_\alpha\phi^\alpha(x)][\partial_\beta\phi^\beta(x)]+{\mu^2\over 2}\phi_\alpha(x)\phi^\alpha(x)

for the real vector field \phi^\alpha(x) with field equations:
[g_{\alpha\beta}(\square+\mu^2)-\partial_\alpha\partial_\beta]\phi^\beta(x)=0

Show that the field \phi^\alpha(x) satisfies the Lorentz condition:
\partial_\alpha\phi^\alpha(x)=0

Homework Equations



See above.

The Attempt at a Solution



[g_{\alpha\beta}(\square+\mu^2)-\partial_\alpha\partial_\beta]\phi^\beta(x)=0
\Rightarrow\partial_\alpha\partial_\beta\phi^\beta(x)=g_{\alpha\beta}(\square+\mu^2)\phi^\beta(x)
\Rightarrow\partial_\alpha\partial_\beta\phi^\beta(x)=g_{\alpha\beta}(\partial^\beta\partial_\beta+\mu^2)\phi^\beta(x)
\Rightarrow\partial_\alpha\partial_\beta\phi^\beta(x)=\partial_\alpha\partial_\beta\phi^\beta(x)+\mu^2g_{\alpha\beta}\phi^\beta(x)
\Rightarrow\mu^2g_{\alpha\beta}\phi^\beta(x)=0
\Rightarrow\mu^2\phi^\beta(x)=0
\Rightarrow\mu^2\partial_\alpha\phi^\alpha(x)=0

I think I've done it, but I don't know if my method is correct. Would anyone be able to validate or refute this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
orentago said:
\Rightarrow\partial_\alpha\partial_\beta\phi^\beta(x)=g_{\alpha\beta}(\square+\mu^2)\phi^\beta(x)
\Rightarrow\partial_\alpha\partial_\beta\phi^\beta(x)=g_{\alpha\beta}(\partial^\beta\partial_\beta+\mu^2)\phi^\beta(x)
<br /> \Rightarrow\partial_\alpha\partial_\beta\phi^\beta (x)=\partial_\alpha\partial_\beta\phi^\beta(x)+\mu ^2g_{\alpha\beta}\phi^\beta(x)<br />

You made a mistake when you used the index \beta for \square = \partial^\gamma\partial_\gamma. You have to use a dummy index and it's not the same as the one on \phi^\beta.

You can obtain the result by considering a particular derivative of the field equations.
 
Ok how about this:

\Rightarrow\partial_\alpha\partial_\beta\phi^\beta (x)=g_{\alpha\beta}(\partial^\gamma\partial_\gamma+\mu^2)\phi^\beta(x)
\Rightarrow\partial^\alpha\partial_\alpha\partial_\beta\phi^\beta (x)=g_{\alpha\beta}\partial^\alpha(\partial^\gamma\partial_\gamma+\mu^2)\phi^\beta(x)
\Rightarrow\square\partial_\beta\phi^\beta (x)=\partial_\beta(\square+\mu^2)\phi^\beta(x)
\Rightarrow\square\partial_\beta\phi^\beta (x)=\square\partial_\beta\phi^\beta(x)+\mu^2\partial_\beta\phi^\beta(x)
\Rightarrow\mu^2\partial_\beta\phi^\beta(x)=0
\Rightarrow\partial_\alpha\phi^\alpha(x)=0
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top