Proving Antisymmetry of Electromagnetic Field Tensor with 4-Force

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving the antisymmetry of the electromagnetic field tensor \(E_{\mu \nu}\) using the equation \(E_{\mu \nu} U^\mu U^\nu = 0\). The key conclusion is that since the dyad \(U^\mu U^\nu\) is symmetric, the only way for the equation to hold for all \(U^\mu\) is if \(E_{\mu \nu}\) is antisymmetric, leading to the result \(E_{\mu \nu} = -E_{\nu \mu}\). The demonstration involves decomposing \(E_{\mu \nu}\) into symmetric and antisymmetric components and showing that the symmetric part must equal zero.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of tensor notation and operations in relativity
  • Familiarity with the concepts of symmetric and antisymmetric tensors
  • Knowledge of the electromagnetic field tensor in the context of special relativity
  • Basic grasp of bilinear maps and their implications in tensor analysis
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of symmetric and antisymmetric tensors in detail
  • Learn about the electromagnetic field tensor and its applications in physics
  • Explore the implications of bilinear maps in tensor analysis
  • Review Rindler's "Relativity: Special, General, and Cosmological" for deeper insights into tensor equations
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for physicists, mathematicians, and students studying electromagnetism and relativity, particularly those interested in tensor calculus and its applications in theoretical physics.

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
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · 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