Maxwell Field in General Relativity: Explained

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the expression of the Maxwell field in the context of general relativity and its notation, particularly in relation to the AdS/CFT correspondence. Participants explore the meaning and implications of the expression for the four-potential and its components.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the notation of the Maxwell field expressed as $$A=A_t(r)dt+B(r)xdy$$ and seeks clarification on its validity and meaning.
  • Another participant suggests that the expression may not be transcribed correctly, asserting that the Maxwell field should be represented as a 2-form involving wedge products.
  • A reference to an arXiv paper is provided to support the notation, indicating it is found in Equation (56) of that paper.
  • There is a suggestion that the expression refers to the potential rather than the field itself, leading to further questions about the notation and its components.
  • Participants discuss the components of the four-potential, with one asserting that the notation is derived from differential form notation, where the 1-form is expressed in terms of its components.
  • Clarifications are made regarding the relationship between the potential and the electromagnetic field, with references to the mathematical formulation of the field in terms of its components.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correctness of the notation and whether it accurately represents the Maxwell field or the potential. There is no consensus on the interpretation of the expression, and multiple competing views remain.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the expression may be unconventional or misrepresented, and there is uncertainty regarding the notation's origins and its implications in the context of field theory.

Einj
Messages
464
Reaction score
59
Hello everyone,
I'm studying some applications of AdS/CFT and I came across an expression of the Maxwell field written in the following way:
$$
A=A_t(r)dt+B(r)xdy.
$$
How does this notation work? Is it simply a way of writing the four-vector? If so, why do we use this notation?
Thanks a lot!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Einj said:
I came across an expression of the Maxwell field written in the following way:
##A=A_t(r)dt+B(r)xdy##.

Are you sure this is transcribed correctly? Can you give the reference for where you got it? It doesn't look right to me; the Maxwell field should be a 2-form, i.e., it should be expressed as a sum of wedge products of the form ##dt \wedge dx##, ##dy \wedge dz##, etc.
 
Looks like the expression is the potential, not the field.

Edit : no idea why he picks this form, didn't read the rest of the paper sorry
 
Last edited:
He calls it field but yes, I pretty sure he means the potential. Does this simply mean that the four-potential have component ##A_t(r)## and ##A_y(r,x)=B(r)x##? If so, where does that notation come from?
 
Einj said:
He calls it field but yes, I pretty sure he means the potential.

Yes, he does.

Einj said:
Does this simply mean that the four-potential have component ##A_t(r)## and ##A_y(r,x)=B(r)x##?

Yes, although I also think ##r = \sqrt{x^2 + y^2 + z^2}##, so any function of ##r## is really a function of ##x, y, z##.

Einj said:
where does that notation come from?

It's differential form notation; the 1-form ##A## is expressed in terms of its components as ##A_{\mu} dx^{\mu}##, where ##dx^{\mu}## are the basis 1-forms ##dt##, ##dx##, ##dy##, and ##dz##. The electromagnetic field itself is then expressed as the 2-form ##F = dA##, which in components is ##F = \frac{1}{2} F_{\mu \nu} dx^{\mu} \wedge dx^{\nu}##, and ##F_{\mu \nu} = \partial_{\mu} A_{\mu} - \partial_{\mu} A_{\nu}##. This notation is often used in field theory.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Einj
Oh great thank you!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
957
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K