Maxwell's equations in curved spacetime.

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the equivalence of two formulations of Maxwell's equations in curved spacetime, specifically focusing on the mathematical relationships and transformations involved. Participants explore the complexities of deriving these relationships, particularly in the context of local coordinates and orthonormal frames.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the equations in both forms and seeks assistance in demonstrating their equivalence, noting difficulties encountered with local coordinates and the use of an orthonormal frame.
  • Another participant confirms completion of related problems and questions whether their solutions might assist in the current problem.
  • A suggestion is made to refer to a specific formula from Riemannian geometry that may aid in simplifying the divergence of an antisymmetric tensor field.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not appear to reach a consensus on the methods for demonstrating the equivalence of the equations, and multiple approaches are discussed without resolution.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the application of the Christoffel symbols in orthonormal frames and the complexities involved in working with local coordinates, indicating potential limitations in their approaches.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in advanced topics in general relativity, mathematical physics, or those working on related problems in textbooks such as Wald's may find this discussion beneficial.

eok20
Messages
198
Reaction score
0
Maxwell's equations in curved spacetime can be written as
\nabla^a F_{ab} = -4\pi j_b, \nabla_{[a} F_{bc] = 0 or as d*F = 4\pi*j, dF = 0, where F is a two-form, j is a one-form and * is the Hodge star. How do you show that these two sets of equations are equivalent (basically, that the first from each set are equivalent since I see how the second ones are equivalent)? I tried working it out in local coordinates but it got really messy e.g. derivatives of the determinant of the metric and I was unable to get anywhere. I also tried to work it out in terms of an orthonormal frame (tetrad) but that didn't work since I don't know if the Christoffel symbols for the connection have a nice form in that basis.

Any help would GREATLY be appreciated.

Note this is problem 2 in chapter 4 of Wald's text.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
eok20 said:
Any help would GREATLY be appreciated.

Note this is problem 2 in chapter 4 of Wald's text.

Are you done with problem 1? Completely? Sure?
 
arkajad said:
Are you done with problem 1? Completely? Sure?

Yes, I've done problem 1 (showing that \nabla^b j_b = 0) as well as problem 2a (showing that ** = +- 1). I am confident in both of my solutions to these-- does one of these help?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Sticky
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
10K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K