1. PF Contest - Win "Conquering the Physics GRE" book! Click Here to Enter
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Origin of the Maxwell energy-momentum tensor?

  1. Aug 11, 2010 #1
    Electrodynamics force is [tex]f_i=F_{ik}j^k=F_{ik}\partial_j F^{jk}[/tex]. I claim that the only way to obtain the Maxwell energy-momentum tensor [tex]T_i^j=-F_{ik}F^{jk}+\delta_i^jF_{kl}F^{kl}/4[/tex] is to write the force as a divergence: [tex]f_i=-\partial_jT_i^j[/tex].
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 11, 2010 #2
    The energy-momentum tensor of any field must have zero divergence.
  4. Aug 11, 2010 #3
    It is a widely-spread delusion.
  5. Aug 12, 2010 #4
    It can also be derived from Noether's theorem, it is the conserved current of translations [itex]x \rightarrow x+a[/itex].
  6. Aug 12, 2010 #5
    It is a widely-spread delusion as well. The Noether's theorem gives various energy momentum tensors, but not the Maxwell tensor.
    Sorry, tex works badly.
    Canonical Lagrangian L_1[tex]L_1=-F_{ij}F^{ij}/4[/tex] gives canonical tensor
    Dirac’s Lagrangian L_2 [tex]L_2=-F_{ij}F^{ij}/4-(\partial_iA^i)^2/2[/tex] gives [tex]T_2{}_i^j=-\partial_iA_kF^{jk}+\delta_i^jF_{kl}F^{kl}/4-\partial_iA^j\partial_kA^k+\delta_i^j(\partial_kA^k)^2/2[/tex],
    Vector Lagrangian [tex]L_3=-\partial_iA^j\partial^iA_j/2[/tex] gives [tex]T_3{}_i^j=-\partial_iA_k\partial^jA^k+\delta_i^j\partial_kA_l\partial^kA^l[/tex],
    Soper’s Lagrangian [1] [tex]L_4=-F_{ij}F^{ij}/4-A_ij^i [/tex] gives [tex]T_4{}_i^j=-\partial_iA_kF^{jk}+\delta_i^jF_{kl}F^{kl}/4+\delta_i^j A_kj^k[/tex]. But Soper was mistaken: he obtain a false tensor [tex]T_f{}_i^j=-\partial_iA_kF^{jk}+\delta_i^jF_{kl}F^{kl}/4+A_ij^j[/tex] [2].
    [1] D. E. Soper, Classical Field Theory (N.Y.: John Wiley, 1976).
    [2] R.I. Khrapko, Professor Soper's mistake http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=43&module=files
    Last edited: Aug 12, 2010
  7. Aug 12, 2010 #6
    The fact that the energy momentum tensor you wrote can be obtained by Noether's theorem is NOT a "delusion": take the formalism of general relativity, take the usual electromagnetic field lagrangian, vary not only the A fields but also the metric, and finally impose the flat space-time metric... what will you get?
  8. Aug 12, 2010 #7
    Emmy Noether did not intend to use curvilinear coordinates. And why we must prefer [tex]T_i^j=-F_{ik}F^{jk}+\delta_i^jF_{kl}F^{kl}/4[/tex] to [tex]T_1{}_i^j=-\partial_iA_kF^{jk}+\delta_i^jF_{kl}F^{kl}/4[/tex], or others?
    By the way, variation of coordinates does not give spin tensor!
  9. Aug 12, 2010 #8
    It's just a conservation law. The symmetric tensor is preferred because it is...symmetric, I guess. Variation of coordinates (and fields) by Lorentz transformations DOES give you the spin tensor. I don't know what Noether intended or not, I havent't read her biography, but using her theorem you get a lot of conservation laws (all, as far as I know) of a lagrangian field theory, regardless if the lagrangian describes a drum, a water wave, a Higgs boson or a general relativistic matter system.
  10. Aug 12, 2010 #9
    You're right that there's a problem with the normal derivation from Noether's theorem, the tensor


    is not gauge invariant. But this can be solved with a couple of tricks. One is to perform a gauge transformation when you vary A, instead of

    [tex]A_\mu (x) \rightarrow A_\mu (x+a) = A_\mu (x) + a^\nu \partial_\nu A_\mu[/tex]

    you can subtract a gauge term like this

    [tex]A_\mu (x) \rightarrow A_\mu (x) + a^\nu \partial_\nu A_\mu - \partial_\mu (a^\nu A_\nu) = A_\mu (x) + a^\nu F_{\nu\mu}[/tex]

    because a is constant, and this gives you the standard gauge invariant stress energy tensor.
  11. Aug 29, 2010 #10
    Sorry, I do not understand your tricks. They gives [tex]T_5{}_i^j=-\partial_iA_kF^{jk}-a^l\partial_iF_{lk} F^{jk}+\delta_i^jF_{kl}F^{kl}/4[/tex] (Sorry, tex works badly)
    My thought is the Lagrange formalism with the Noether's theorem cannot give the electromagnetic energy-momentum tensor. And the deriving of this tensor, which is described in all textbooks, is a mistake. See [1]
    [1] R.I.Khrapko, “Mechanical stresses produced by a light beam,” J. Modern Optics, 55, 1487-1500 (2008) http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?module=files&id=9
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2010
  12. Aug 30, 2010 #11
    Sorry but I don't understand how you got that expression. I may have messed up, I don't know. I got the standard Maxwell stress energy tensor from the general equation for a Noether current.

    If you have some fields [itex]\phi_a (x)[/itex] and a lagrangian [itex]\mathcal{L}(\phi_a (x),\partial_\mu \phi_a (x))[/itex], and if the action is invariant under some symmetry, you can transform the fields like this:
    [tex]\phi_a (x) \rightarrow \phi_a (x) + \epsilon^\alpha \Phi_{a\alpha}(x)[/tex]
    where epsilon is an infinitesimal parameter and Phi encodes the transformation in terms of phi. The lagrangian transforms like
    [tex]\mathcal{L} \rightarrow \mathcal{L} + \epsilon^\alpha \partial_\mu \Lambda^\mu_\alpha[/tex]
    So that the action is invariant. Then the Noether current is
    [tex]j^\mu_\alpha = \frac{\partial\mathcal{L}}{\partial(\partial_\mu \phi_a)}\Phi_{a\alpha} - \Lambda^\mu_\alpha[/tex]
    To get the Maxwell stress energy tensor, set [itex]\phi_a = A_\mu[/itex] so that a is a spacetime index, and set [itex]\epsilon^\alpha = a^\nu[/itex] where a is a constant infinitesimal vector so that alpha is also a spacetime index. Then to get the standard Maxwell stress energy tensor we require [itex]\Phi_{a\alpha} = F_{\mu\nu}[/itex] which I got by Taylor expanding A as normal, [itex]A_\mu (x) \rightarrow A_\mu (x) + a^\nu \partial_\nu A_\mu[/itex] then subtracting a gauge term, which doesn't affect the lagrangian, so it won't affect Lambda either. That gives [itex]a^\nu \Phi_{\mu\nu} = a^\nu \partial_\nu A_\mu - a^\nu \partial_\mu A_\nu = a^\nu F_{\mu\nu}[/itex] I think that works but I'm not 100%, if you found a mistake let me know...
  13. Aug 31, 2010 #12
    Usually, when deriving the Noether current (energy-momentum or angular momentum tensor), they use an infinitesimal coordinate transformation rather than transformation of field (the field satisfies Euler-Lagrange equations, i.e. field equations). Please present your calculation in details as an attachment.
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook