Electric / magnetic field transformations

CompuChip
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Messages
4,305
Reaction score
49
Hi. I thought I had tensors and Lorentz transformations under control, but now I'm in doubt again.

For example, consider the electromagnetic field tensor
F_{\mu\nu} = \begin{pmatrix}<br /> 0 &amp; -E_1 &amp; -E_2 &amp; -E_3 \\<br /> E_1 &amp; 0 &amp; B_3 &amp; -B_2 \\<br /> E_2 &amp; -B_3 &amp; 0 &amp; B_1 \\<br /> E_3 &amp; B_2 &amp; -B_1 &amp; 0 \\<br /> \end{pmatrix} <br /> \qquad\text{ so } <br /> F^{\mu\nu} = \begin{pmatrix}<br /> 0 &amp; E_1 &amp; E_2 &amp; E_3 \\<br /> -E_1 &amp; 0 &amp; B_3 &amp; -B_2 \\<br /> -E_2 &amp; -B_3 &amp; 0 &amp; B_1 \\<br /> -E_3 &amp; B_2 &amp; -B_1 &amp; 0 \\<br /> \end{pmatrix}<br />
in the (-1, 1, 1, 1) metric.

Now we apply a Lorentz transformation, and to keep it simple we take a (counter clockwise) rotation around an angle \theta about the z-axis. Now I thought I'd write this as
R^\mu_\nu = \begin{pmatrix}<br /> 1 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; \cos\theta &amp; -\sin\theta &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; \sin\theta &amp; \cos\theta &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 1 \\<br /> \end{pmatrix}<br />
as it works on a vector and produces a vector ((v&#039;)^\mu = R^\mu_\nu v^\nu).
Did I get this right? In this case wrong placement of the indices doesn't introduce errors yet, as far as I can see, but this will generally not be the case for boosts (which do not have just zeros in the first column and row).

Now the components of the electric field E_i = F_{i0} transform as
E_i&#039; = F&#039;_{i0} = R_i^\mu R_0^\nu F_{\mu\nu}.
Working out the transformation yields
E_1&#039; = E_1 \cos\theta - E_2 \sin \theta; \quad<br /> E_2&#039; = E_1 \sin\theta + E_2 \cos \theta; \quad<br /> E_3&#039; = E_3,<br />
which can be written in vector notation as
\vec E&#039; = \mat R \vec E<br /> \qquad\text{ where }<br /> \mat R = \begin{pmatrix}<br /> \cos\theta &amp; -\sin\theta &amp; 0 \\<br /> \sin\theta &amp; \cos\theta &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 1 \\<br /> \end{pmatrix},<br />
which is, I think, the transformation rule for a vector hence what one would expect.

Similarly, the components of the magnetic field are B_i = \frac12 \epsilon_{ijk} F^{jk}.
As raising both the indices on F_{\mu\nu} does not affect the components in the
lower right 3 \times 3 block -- that is, F_{ij} = F^{ij} for i, j = 1, 2, 3 --
we can calculate
B_i&#039; = \frac12 \epsilon_{ijk} F&#039;^{jk} = \frac12 \epsilon_{ijk} R^j_\mu R^k_\nu F^{\mu\nu}.
Explicit calculation yields
B_1&#039; = B_1 \cos\theta - B_2 \sin\theta; \quad<br /> B_2&#039; = B_1 \sin\theta + B_2 \cos\theta; \quad<br /> B_3&#039; = B_3,<br />
which is exactly the same as the electric field. Yet the magnetic field is not a vector, but a pseudo-vector; therefore I doubt my answer.

I'd like to get this right, especially with the indices etc., before I proceed to boosts, e.g.
R^\mu_\nu \to \Lambda^\mu_\nu = \begin{pmatrix}<br /> \cosh\theta &amp; \sinh\theta &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\<br /> \sinh\theta &amp; \cosh\theta &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 1 &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 1 \\<br /> \end{pmatrix}<br />

Thanks a lot.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
CompuChip said:
which is exactly the same as the electric field. Yet the magnetic field is not a vector, but a pseudo-vector; therefore I doubt my answer.

Even though it is a pseudo-vector, it is supposed to transform like a vector in rotations. You should check space reflections to see if you get the desired difference in the transformation of E and B.
 
Using GRtensor, I take

<br /> F_{ab} =\left[ \begin {array}{cccc} 0&amp;-{\it Ex}&amp;-{\it Ey}&amp;-{\it Ez}\\\noalign{\medskip}{\it Ex}&amp;0&amp;{\it Bz}&amp;-{\it By}\\\noalign{\medskip}{<br /> \it Ey}&amp;-{\it Bz}&amp;0&amp;{\it Bx}\\\noalign{\medskip}{\it Ez}&amp;{\it By}&amp;-{<br /> \it Bx}&amp;0\end {array} \right] <br />

and
<br /> L^a{}_b = \left[ \begin {array}{cccc} 1&amp;0&amp;0&amp;0\\\noalign{\medskip}0&amp;\cos \left( \theta \right) &amp;-\sin \left( \theta \right) &amp;0\\\noalign{\medskip}0&amp;<br /> \sin \left( \theta \right) &amp;\cos \left( \theta \right) &amp;0<br /> \\\noalign{\medskip}0&amp;0&amp;0&amp;1\end {array} \right] <br />

to compute

<br /> F^{\prime}_{ab} = F_{cd} L^c{}_a L^d{}_b

which is

<br /> \left[ \begin {array}{cccc} 0&amp;-{\it Ex}\,\cos \left( \theta \right) -{\it Ey}\,\sin \left( \theta \right) &amp;{\it Ex}\,\sin \left( \theta<br /> \right) -{\it Ey}\,\cos \left( \theta \right) &amp;-{\it Ez}<br /> \\\noalign{\medskip}{\it Ex}\,\cos \left( \theta \right) +{\it Ey}\,<br /> \sin \left( \theta \right) &amp;0&amp;{\it Bz}\, \left( \cos \left( \theta<br /> \right) \right) ^{2}+{\it Bz}\, \left( \sin \left( \theta \right) <br /> \right) ^{2}&amp;-{\it By}\,\cos \left( \theta \right) +{\it Bx}\,\sin<br /> \left( \theta \right) \\\noalign{\medskip}-{\it Ex}\,\sin \left( <br /> \theta \right) +{\it Ey}\,\cos \left( \theta \right) &amp;-{\it Bz}\,<br /> \left( \sin \left( \theta \right) \right) ^{2}-{\it Bz}\, \left( <br /> \cos \left( \theta \right) \right) ^{2}&amp;0&amp;{\it By}\,\sin \left( <br /> \theta \right) +{\it Bx}\,\cos \left( \theta \right) <br /> \\\noalign{\medskip}{\it Ez}&amp;{\it By}\,\cos \left( \theta \right) -{<br /> \it Bx}\,\sin \left( \theta \right) &amp;-{\it By}\,\sin \left( \theta<br /> \right) -{\it Bx}\,\cos \left( \theta \right) &amp;0\end {array} \right] <br />

I didn't think this quite matched some of the signs in your result, but I thought it might be helpful.
 
Last edited:
jostpuur, of course you are right about the (pseudo)-vector remark. Thanks.

pervect: I think you calculated L^T F L whereas I did L F L^T. One of us should be wrong then (and it's probably me), which would mean I messed up the indices... just what I was afraid of.

[edit]I found it, there was an error in my Mathematica code (it read
Code:
e[i_] := Sum[R[[i, \[Mu]]] R[[1, \[Nu]]] F[[\[Mu], \[Nu]]], {\[Mu], 1, 4}, {\[Nu], 1, 4}]
instead of
Code:
e[i_] := Sum[R[[\[Mu], i]] R[[\[Nu], 1]] F[[\[Mu], \[Nu]]], {\[Mu], 1, 4}, {\[Nu], 1, 4}]
-- note the indices of the rotation matrix.
So apparently we agree now.[/edit].
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
According to the General Theory of Relativity, time does not pass on a black hole, which means that processes they don't work either. As the object becomes heavier, the speed of matter falling on it for an observer on Earth will first increase, and then slow down, due to the effect of time dilation. And then it will stop altogether. As a result, we will not get a black hole, since the critical mass will not be reached. Although the object will continue to attract matter, it will not be a...
Back
Top