Proving Antisymmetry of Electromagnetic Field Tensor with 4-Force

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around demonstrating the antisymmetry of the electromagnetic field tensor, specifically how the equation $$E_{\mu \nu} U^\mu U^\nu = 0$$ implies that the tensor $$E_{\mu \nu}$$ is antisymmetric. The context includes theoretical reasoning and mathematical justification within the framework of relativity.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about how the equation $$E_{\mu \nu} U^\mu U^\nu = 0$$ leads to the conclusion that $$E_{\mu \nu}$$ is antisymmetric.
  • Another participant suggests that since the dyad $$U^\mu U^\nu$$ is symmetric, the only way for the equation to hold for all vectors is if $$E_{\mu \nu}$$ is antisymmetric.
  • A different approach is proposed where $$E_{\mu\nu}$$ is expressed as a sum of a symmetric tensor $$S_{\mu\nu}$$ and an antisymmetric tensor $$A_{\mu\nu}$$, leading to the conclusion that the symmetric part must vanish for the equation to hold.
  • One participant acknowledges a mistake in a previous post and requests its deletion.
  • Another participant points out that the argument relies on the symmetry of $$U^\mu U^\nu$$, suggesting that this fact simplifies the reasoning.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the need to demonstrate the antisymmetry of the tensor but present different methods and reasoning. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the most straightforward or rigorous approach to the proof.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved aspects regarding the assumptions made about the tensors and the implications of their symmetry properties. The discussion does not reach a consensus on the best method for demonstrating the antisymmetry.

Little Gravity
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
Trying to proove the antisymmetry of Electromagnetic Field Tensor via the orthogonality property of 4-Force with respect the 4-velocity of some particle
I've already made a post about this topic here, but I realized that I didn't understand the explanation on that post. in Chapter 7 of Rindler's book on relativity, in section about electromagnetic field tensor, he states that

_and introducing a factor 1/c for later convenience, we can ‘guess’ the tensor equation_, $$ F_\mu= \frac{q}{c} E_{\mu \nu} U^\nu$$
_thereby introducing the electromagnetic field tensor_$$E_{\mu \nu}$$
_We would surely want the
force $F\mu$ to be rest-mass preserving, which, according to (6.44) and (7.15), requires_
$$F_\mu U^\mu = 0$$. _So we need_
$$E_{\mu \nu} U^\mu U^\nu = 0$$
_for all $ U^\mu$ , and hence the antisymmetry of the field tensor_
$$E_{\mu \nu}= −E_{\nu \mu}$$\\

.
.
.
I'm really confused about the correct way to show that the equation $$E_{\mu \nu} U^\mu U^\nu = 0$$ implies the fact that $$E_{\mu\nu}$$ is antisymmetric tensor. What is the correct demonstration of this implication?

OBS: I've saw some posts answering this kind of question with bilinear maps notation, instead of component notation. If possible, please make some demonstration using the index notation as in the post.

Another OBS: I'm NOT trying do proove that antisymmetry implies the null equation. I'm trying to proove that the null equation implies the antisymmetry of the field tensor.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Little Gravity said:
What is the correct demonstration of this implication?

The dyad ##U^\mu U^\nu## is obviously symmetric. So the only way for ##E_{\mu \nu} U^\mu U^\nu = 0## to always hold is for ##E_{\mu \nu}## to be antisymmetric.
 
We can write
E_{\mu\nu}=S_{\mu\nu} + A_{\mu\nu}
where S is symmetric tensor and A is antisymmetric tensor.

E_{\mu\nu}U^\mu U^\nu=S_{\nu\mu}U^\nu U^\mu+A_{\nu\mu}U^\nu U^\mu
E_{\nu\mu}U^\nu U^\mu=S_{\mu\nu}U^\mu U^\nu+A_{\mu\nu}U^\mu U^\nu

Summing the both sides
E_{\mu\nu}U^\mu U^\nu+E_{\nu\mu}U^\nu U^\mu=2S_{\mu\nu}U^\mu U^\nu=0

S_{\mu\nu}=0
Only anti-symmetric component ##A_{\mu\nu}## survives.

EDIT: I found I have failed to delete my previous wrong post #2. Please disregard it.
 
Last edited:
anuttarasammyak said:
I found I have failed to delete my previous wrong post #2.

You can always ask a moderator to delete a post if it is outside your edit window. I have just deleted your post #2.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: anuttarasammyak
anuttarasammyak said:
Only anti-symmetric component ##A_{\mu \nu}## survives.

As long as you make use of the fact, which you have not explicitly stated, that ##U^\mu U^\nu## is symmetric. You have implicitly used that fact in your second, third, and fourth equations. And if you make use of that fact, you have a much simpler argument that gets you to the same conclusion--the argument I gave in my first post in this thread (which is now post #2).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
13K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K