Invariant quantities in the EM field

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the invariance of the quantities E^2 - B^2 and E · B under Lorentz/Poincare transformations, which are fundamental in understanding electromagnetic (EM) fields. It is clarified that while E and B are components of EM waves, they can also represent more general radiated EM fields, leading to the scalar product E · B not always being zero. The invariance of these quantities is noted to have limited physical significance, primarily aiding in the formulation of Lagrangian density for deriving field equations. The conversation highlights the complexity of the relationship between electric and magnetic fields, especially under transformations that mix space and time. Understanding these concepts is crucial for grasping the nature of light and electromagnetic radiation.
Mentz114
Messages
5,429
Reaction score
292
I understand that the quantities

E^2 - B^2

\vec{E} \cdot \vec{B}

(the dot is vector inner product).
where E and B are the electric and magnetic components of an EM wave,
are invariant under Lorentz/Poincare transformations.
Can someone explain the physical significance of this ? Is either quantity related to the velocity of light ( or the invariance of the velocity of light ) ?

The second expression must be zero at all times surely ?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Mentz114 said:
I understand that the quantities

E^2 - B^2

\vec{E} \cdot \vec{B}

(the dot is vector inner product).
where E and B are the electric and magnetic components of an EM wave,
are invariant under Lorentz/Poincare transformations.
Can someone explain the physical significance of this ? Is either quantity related to the velocity of light ( or the invariance of the velocity of light ) ?

The second expression must be zero at all times surely ?

Not necessarily wave. An EM wave is just a particular case of a radiated EM field. That's why the scalar product is not always 0, because the radiated EM field is not always a wave.

There's not too much physical significance of the invariants, just that the first one is good for a lagrangian density since it leads to field equations second order in time.

Daniel.
 
Thanks, Daniel.

I didn't know there are solutions to Maxwells equations other than the EM wave.

It's hard getting my head around the idea that the E and B fields 'mix' like space and time, when boosted.
 
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