Dot product of electric and magnetic field conserved in special relativity?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the equality of the dot products of electric and magnetic fields in different inertial reference frames, specifically exploring the relationship E·H = E'·H' using Lorentz transformations. The context is rooted in special relativity and electromagnetic theory.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of Lorentz transformations to demonstrate the invariance of the scalar product of electric and magnetic fields. Questions arise about the necessity of deriving this equality rather than relying on theoretical principles. Some participants mention the role of electromagnetic tensors and inquire about their relevance to the problem.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing with various participants contributing insights and questions. Some guidance has been offered regarding the use of transformation laws for electric and magnetic fields, and there is acknowledgment of the complexity of the problem. Multiple interpretations and approaches are being explored without a clear consensus yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the scalar product E·H is considered an invariant of the electromagnetic field, which adds complexity to the proof. There is also mention of the need for specific transformation equations and the challenge of deriving results without relying solely on established theory.

ralph961
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
An inertial reference frame 2 is moving along the x-axis with constant velocity v with respect to inertial reference frame 1.
......->-> ->->
How can i prove the E.H = E'.H' ?? (dot product)
using the 4 dimensional (Ax,Ay,Az,phi)
where E = -1/c dA/dt - gradiant(phi)
and H = curl(A)
Where E is the electric field and H the magnetic field.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ralph961 said:
An inertial reference frame 2 is moving along the x-axis with constant velocity v with respect to inertial reference frame 1.
......->-> ->->
How can i prove the E.H = E'.H' ?? (dot product)
using the 4 dimensional (Ax,Ay,Az,phi)
where E = -1/c dA/dt - gradiant(phi)
and H = curl(A)
Where E is the electric field and H the magnetic field.
If they weren't the same, inertial frames would not be equivalent.

The principle of relativity states that the laws of physics are the same in all frames of reference. The Lorentz transformations for Maxwell's equations were developed by applying that principle. So by applying the Lorentz transformations you don't prove the principle of relativity, you just confirm that the transformations were derived correctly.

The answer to your question is contained in http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/#SECTION20"

AM
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank you for replying,
It is noted by my professor that:
Note that this result is highly non-trivial since usually the 3-dimensional scalar
product is NOT preserved under the 4-dimensional Lorenz transformations, so the case of the scalar product (E.H) is very special - it is the same in all the reference frames. This important scalar product is known as one of the invariants of the electromagnetic field.

I need to prove that E.H= E'.H', not by theory but i have to derive that they are equal using lorentz transformation.
Is that possible and how?
 
Are you familiar with the electromagnetic tensors [tex]F^{\alpha \beta}[/tex]? If you are, this is a result of that tensor and the tensor [tex]\mathfrak{F}^{\alpha \beta}[/tex] being multiplied together, and taking the trace, and such.
 
No I'm not familiar with that.
Sorry..
So the dot product E.B is always 0 in all reference frames?
 
Special relativity help

A body travels at a speed c/10 from point A to point B distant 3 light years.
Is the time of the event "arrival of the body at B" with respect to the inertial reference frame at A, 30 years or 30.15 years?
 
ralph961 said:
Thank you for replying,
It is noted by my professor that:
Note that this result is highly non-trivial since usually the 3-dimensional scalar
product is NOT preserved under the 4-dimensional Lorenz transformations, so the case of the scalar product (E.H) is very special - it is the same in all the reference frames. This important scalar product is known as one of the invariants of the electromagnetic field.

I need to prove that E.H= E'.H', not by theory but i have to derive that they are equal using lorentz transformation.
Is that possible and how?

Yes. You only need to use the transformations laws of H and E. Do you have those equations? It's just plugging in.
 
I have the transformation laws of (Ax,Ay,Az,phi) which are like the (x,y,z,ct)
A=(Ax,Ay,Az) and phi are defined by
E = -1/c dA/dt - gradiant(phi)
and H = curl(A)
 
The only way I've seen it proved is with 4-tensors. However, maybe you have the results of the 4-tensor analysis without the analysis itself. Have you seen:
[tex] \vec{E}^\prime_\perp = \gamma_0 (\vec{E}_\perp + \vec{\beta}_0 \times c \vec{B}_\perp)[/tex]
[tex] c \vec{B}^\prime_\perp = \gamma_0 (c \vec{B}_\perp - \vec{\beta}_0 \times \vec{E}_\perp)[/tex]
[tex] E^\prime_\parallel = E_\parallel[/tex]
[tex] B^\prime_\parallel = B_\parallel[/tex]

These are all derived from knowing how the 4 vector you've mentioned (A) transforms, and how it relates to EM fields. If you've seen these, you can definitely use them to show that E.B is invariant.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
Fixed your tex -

[tex]c \vec{B}^\prime_\perp = \gamma_0 (c \vec{B}_\perp - \vec{\beta}_0 \times \vec{E}_\perp)[/tex]
 

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K