Raising Index of Electromagnetic Energy Momentum Tensor

  • Thread starter jstrunk
  • Start date
  • #1
41
0

Main Question or Discussion Point

The General Relativity text I am using gives two forms of the Electromagnetic Energy Momentum Tensor:
[tex]{\rm{ }}\mu _0 S_{ij} = F_{ik} F_{jk} - \frac{1}{4}\delta _{ij} F_{kl} F_{kl} \\[/tex]
[tex]{\rm{ }}\mu _0 S_j^i = F^{ik} F_{jk} - \frac{1}{4}\delta _{ij} F^{kl} F_{kl} \\[/tex]

I dont see how these are equivalent. Raising one index on the left entitles you to raise one index on
each term on the right, but instead they raised two indexes on the right. Can anyone explain this?
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Mentz114
Gold Member
5,428
290
The General Relativity text I am using gives two forms of the Electromagnetic Energy Momentum Tensor:
[tex]{\rm{ }}\mu _0 S_{ij} = F_{ik} F_{jk} - \frac{1}{4}\delta _{ij} F_{kl} F_{kl} \\[/tex]
[tex]{\rm{ }}\mu _0 S_j^i = F^{ik} F_{jk} - \frac{1}{4}\delta _{ij} F^{kl} F_{kl} \\[/tex]

I dont see how these are equivalent. Raising one index on the left entitles you to raise one index on
each term on the right, but instead they raised two indexes on the right. Can anyone explain this?
The first one has two covariant indexes called k in the rhs, also index l is down twice. That is not right.

The second equation is better , every term has the correct i, j indexes, except the ##\delta_{ij}## should be ##\delta^i_j##
 
  • #3
41
0
The first equation which you say is wrong is the one that is derived in the book from the vector form of Maxwell's Equations.
The second equation is just stated 75 pages later as if it was an obvious consequence of the first.
I assumed the error was in the second equation but maybe I will have to check the derivation of the first equation again.
 
  • #4
PeterDonis
Mentor
Insights Author
2019 Award
27,472
7,503
The General Relativity text I am using
Which text?
 
  • #5
41
0
I am using Introduction to Tensor Calculus, Relativity and Cosmology by Lawden. He never actually derives the erroneous first equation but derives other things from it. I found a correct derivation that I can use but naturally every possible convention differs from Lawden so it was a bit of work to convert it.
 
  • #6
George Jones
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,259
790
At this point in Lawden, he restricts to inertial frames in special relativity, and he uses the the ict convention, so, numerically (but not conceptually), there is no distinction between up and down indices.
 
  • #7
41
0
Lawden Section 28 says the Electromagnetic 4 - force density is [tex]D_i = F_{ij} J_j = \frac{1}{{\mu _0 }}F_{ij} F_{jk,k}[/tex].
In Section 56 it says [tex]D_i = F_{ij} J^i[/tex] which implies for flat space [tex]D_i = F_{ij} J^j = \frac{1}{{\mu _0 }}F_{ij} F_{,k}^{jk}[/tex].
Can someone verify that the statement from Section 28 is another mistake in the book and that [tex]D_i = F_{ij} J^j = \frac{1}{{\mu _0 }}F_{ij} F_{,k}^{jk}[/tex] is correct?
 
  • #8
Mentz114
Gold Member
5,428
290
Lawden Section 28 says the Electromagnetic 4 - force density is
..
..
[tex]D_i = F_{ij} J^j = \frac{1}{{\mu _0 }}F_{ij}{ F^{jk}}_{,k}[/tex] is correct?
That looks OK. The indexes are certainly well formed.
 

Related Threads for: Raising Index of Electromagnetic Energy Momentum Tensor

Replies
1
Views
623
Replies
3
Views
439
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
376
Replies
10
Views
15K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
355
Top