EM Stress-Energy Tensor Derivation: Understanding the Symmetry and Conditions

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the derivation of the electromagnetic (EM) stress-energy tensor, emphasizing the need for symmetry in the tensor and the conditions under which it is derived. The user seeks clarity on why the stress-energy tensor must be symmetric and what constraints prevent the addition of arbitrary constants. They express a specific interest in deriving the EM stress-energy tensor for an SU(N) gauge field in a material context, where constitutive relations are not defined. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding the derivation in free space to facilitate generalization to more complex fields. Overall, the user aims to grasp the foundational principles behind the stress-energy tensor's symmetry and its application in various material scenarios.
michael879
Messages
696
Reaction score
7
Can someone please walk me through (or provide a link that does) the derivation of the EM stress-energy tensor? I get all the concepts I'm just a little confused on some of the details. Basically, you have the definition of the stress energy tensor in terms of the lagrangian, and the condition that \partial_\mu T^{\mu\nu} = 0. What you end up with is an expression that can have anything added to it as long as its derivative remains 0. This is how you generally make the stress-energy tensor symmetric. What I'm confused about is WHY it has to be symmetric, and what prevents you from adding arbitrary constants to it? Is there some condition I'm missing?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ok to add a little more detail to what I'm looking for, I'm trying to derive the E&M stress energy tensor for an SU(N) gauge field in a "material" (i.e. the constitutive relations relating E and B to D and H are undefined). This is a trivial exercise, since the stress-energy tensor is easily derived from the lagrangian. My problem is in getting an expression like the U(1) stress-energy tensor in free space, which is typically made to be symmetric. If I could just understand why it has to be made symmetric, and what the E&M stress-energy tensor is in some material, it would help a lot (generalizing to an SU(N) field is easy).

So basically I'm looking for:
1) a detailed derivation and explanation of the free-space E&M stress-energy tensor
2) the E&M stress-energy tensor without the assumption of a linear material (i.e. undefined constitutive relations)
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top