General relativity, integration over a manifold exercise

kyp4
Messages
19
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



The problem I am facing is 2.9 in Sean Carroll's book on general relativity (Geometry and Spacetime) I should note that I am not studying this formally and so a full solution would not be unwelcome, though I understand that forum policy understandably prohibits it. The full problem is stated as

In Minkowski space, suppose that *F = q \sin{\theta} d\theta\wedge d\phi.

a.) Evaluate d*F=*J
b.) What is the two-form F equal to?
c.) What are the electric and magnetic fields equal to for this solution?
d.) Evaluate \int_V d*F, where V is a ball of radius R in Euclidean three-space at a fixed moment of time.

Homework Equations



In the above the asterisk denotes the Hodge dual and the d denotes the exterior derivative. The definitions of these operators should be well known.

The Attempt at a Solution



I think I have the first three parts solved. For each part a.) I arrived at the lengthy result of

<br /> \frac{1}{2}[\partial_\mu(*F)_{\mu\rho} - \partial_\nu(*F)_{\mu\rho} + \partial_\nu(*F)_{\rho\mu} - \partial_\rho(*F)_{\nu\rmu} + \partial_\rho(*F)_{\mu\nu} - \partial_\mu(*F)_{\rho\nu} = \epsilon^\sigma_{\mu\nu\rho}J_\sigma<br />

For part b.) I got (with the help of my TI-89) the two-form, in matrix form,

<br /> F = -(**F) = \left[<br /> \begin{array}{cccc}<br /> 0 &amp; \frac{q}{r^4 \sin{\theta}} &amp; 0 &amp; 0\\<br /> \frac{-q}{r^4 \sin{\theta}} &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp;0\\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0\\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0<br /> \end{array}<br /> \right]<br />

and for c.) I arrived at, directly from part b.),

E_r = \frac{-q}{r^4 \sin{\theta}}
E_\theta = 0
E_\phi = 0

B_\mu = 0

For \mu=1,2,3.

Verification of these would be appreciated but I am especially confused about the last part d.). In particular the integrand is a three-form and I have no idea how to integrate this and how to transform the integral into a familiar volume integral that can be computed by standard multivariable calculus.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This needs to be moved to the Special and General Relativity forum.

Perhaps there is will get some attention.

Thanks
Matt
 
Thanks, I will try my luck over there.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top