Field strength tensor / matrix

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the representation of the field strength tensor in electromagnetism, specifically the differences in notation and sign conventions used in various texts. Participants explore the implications of these differences on the formulation of Maxwell's equations and the definitions of covariant and contravariant vectors.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that the field strength tensor can be represented in different forms, leading to questions about their equivalence.
  • One participant suggests that the differences arise from the definitions of the metric and the derivatives involved.
  • Another participant mentions the antisymmetry property of the tensor, indicating that \( F^{\beta \alpha} = -F^{\alpha \beta} \) may play a role in the differing representations.
  • A participant discusses the relationship between the components of the tensor and the definitions of covariant and contravariant vectors, suggesting that conventions may vary.
  • It is proposed that both notations can yield the correct form of Maxwell's equations, although there is uncertainty about how they can be considered equal given their differing signs.
  • One participant emphasizes that both notations are practically equivalent, contingent on the definition of the current four-vector used in the equations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the equivalence of the two notations for the field strength tensor, with some asserting that they are equivalent while others question how they can be equal given the sign differences. The discussion remains unresolved regarding a definitive consensus on this topic.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the dependence on definitions and conventions, particularly regarding the metric and the treatment of covariant versus contravariant vectors. There is also mention of the implications for the formulation of Maxwell's equations, but no specific resolutions are reached.

Abigale
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
In my note,
we have written the field strength tensor as:

[itex]F^{\mu\nu} =\partial ^\mu A^\nu -\partial ^\nu A^\mu = <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> 0&E_x &E_y&E_z \\<br /> -E_x&0 &B_z &-B_y \\<br /> -E_y&-B_z &0 &B_x \\<br /> -E_z&B_y &-B_x&0 <br /> \end{pmatrix}<br /> <br /> <br /> [/itex]

But if I look into another book or wiki it is written as:


[itex] F^{\mu\nu} =\partial ^\mu A^\nu -\partial ^\nu A^\mu = <br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> 0&-E_x &-E_y&-E_z \\<br /> E_x&0 &-B_z &B_y \\<br /> E_y&B_z &0 &-B_x \\<br /> E_z&-B_y &B_x&0 <br /> \end{pmatrix}<br /> <br /> [/itex]


Why is it possible to write the field strength tensor in both notations?
And are both notations really equal?

THX
Abby
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It depends on how you define your metric and thus the [itex]∂^{μ}[/itex]
 
I think it comes from that $$F^{\alpha \beta} $$ is an antysymmetric tensor. So I can use $$F^{\beta \alpha} =-F^{ \alpha \beta}$$ but I am not sure.
Need help^^

Both definitions of $$\partial ^\mu$$ are in both cases equal.
 
Well then try for example to write the first line:
[itex]F^{0i}=∂^{0}A^{i}-∂^{i}A^{0}[/itex]
Now I am not sure about minus/plus conventions I would write it:
[itex]F^{0i}=\frac{∂A^{i}}{∂t}-∇_{i}Φ= Ε^{i}[/itex]
So that's what I'd use...
it has to do I guess with how you define covariant and contravariant vectors.
 
Abigale said:
In my note,
we have written the field strength tensor as:

[itex]F^{\mu\nu} =\partial ^\mu A^\nu -\partial ^\nu A^\mu = <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> 0&E_x &E_y&E_z \\<br /> -E_x&0 &B_z &-B_y \\<br /> -E_y&-B_z &0 &B_x \\<br /> -E_z&B_y &-B_x&0 <br /> \end{pmatrix}<br /> <br /> <br /> [/itex]

But if I look into another book or wiki it is written as:


[itex] F^{\mu\nu} =\partial ^\mu A^\nu -\partial ^\nu A^\mu = <br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> 0&-E_x &-E_y&-E_z \\<br /> E_x&0 &-B_z &B_y \\<br /> E_y&B_z &0 &-B_x \\<br /> E_z&-B_y &B_x&0 <br /> \end{pmatrix}<br /> <br /> [/itex]


Why is it possible to write the field strength tensor in both notations?

Because you can use either one to write the correct form of Maxwell equations:
[tex]\partial_{ \mu } F_{ 1 }^{ \mu \nu } = - \partial_{ \mu } F_{ 2 }^{ \mu \nu } = - e J^{ \nu }[/tex]

And are both notations really equal?

How can they be equal? [itex]F_{ 1 }^{ \mu \nu } = - F_{ 2 }^{ \mu \nu }[/itex].
 
well the problem is that both notations are practically equivalent- you will just have to define differently the current 4vector...
In the Lagrangian what appears is the [itex]F_{μν}F^{μν}[/itex], and whether you have them with a minus each, they will lead in the same equations of motion...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K