1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    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!

Homework Help: Rewriting Maxwell's Equations in Tensor Form

  1. Sep 10, 2012 #1
    1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data

    From Sean Carroll's notes on general relativity (chapter 1, pg. 20):

    Show that [itex]F_{[\alpha\beta,\gamma]} = 0[/itex] is equivalent to half of the Maxwell equations.

    2. Relevant equations

    [itex]F_{\mu\nu}[/itex] is the electromagnetic tensor

    [itex]\Phi_{,\nu} \equiv \partial_{\nu}\Phi[/itex]

    [itex]F_{i0}= E_{i}[/itex]

    [itex]F_{ij}= \epsilon^{ijk}B_{k}[/itex]

    3. The attempt at a solution

    I'm specifically looking to turn Maxwell's (homogeneous) equations into tensor form, not just show that they fall out of [itex]F_{[\alpha\beta,\gamma]} = 0[/itex]. I sort of have a solution, but I feel like I'm missing a step.

    \nabla×\textbf{E} + \partial_{t}\textbf{B} = 0 \\
    \nabla\cdot \textbf{B} = 0
    \epsilon^{ijk}\partial_{j}E_{k} + \partial_{0}B^{i} = 0 \\
    \partial_{i}B^{i} = 0
    \epsilon^{ijk}\partial_{j}F_{k0} + \frac{1}{2}\epsilon^{ijk}\partial_{0}F_{jk} = 0 \\
    \frac{1}{2}\epsilon^{ijk}\partial_{i}F_{jk} = 0

    which can be rewritten as:

    [itex]\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}\partial_{\rho}F_{\mu \nu} = 0[/itex]

    which, up to a normalization constant, is just:

    [itex]F_{[\alpha\beta,\gamma]} = 0[/itex]

    My question is about going from step 3 to step 4. I sort of pulled it out of my hat and checked that it was correct (term by term). I'm looking for some kind of justification for this step, or a nudge in the right direction if I'm approaching this all wrong.

    Also, I'm still getting the hang of tensor notation, and I feel like equation 4 doesn't make sense. Only 3 indices are contracted, leaving the right side a vector, not a scalar. On the other hand, trying to use the Levi-Civita tensor with 3 indices here seems wrong too, as the indices run from 0 to 4 leaving you with stuff like [itex]\epsilon^{013}[/itex].
  2. jcsd
  3. May 26, 2015 #2
    Bump. : (
  4. May 29, 2015 #3


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    The first equation in your step 3 is actually three equations, one for each value of i. And the second equation is just one. That's why the final result is a set of four equations.

    I think the final step will be easier to understand if you make sure that you understand every step of the following rewrites: (Here A is anything with three indices from 0 to 3).

    &\varepsilon^{ijk} A_{ijk} =\varepsilon^{ijk0} A_{ijk} =\varepsilon^{\mu\nu\rho 0} A_{\mu\nu\rho}\\
    &\varepsilon^{ijk} A_{0jk} =\varepsilon^{0jki} A_{0jk} =\varepsilon^{0\nu\rho i} A_{0\nu\rho} =\varepsilon^{\mu\nu\rho i} A_{\mu\nu\rho}
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted