I Solving Spinorial Maxwell's Equations with Wald

  • Thread starter Thread starter ergospherical
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Maxwell's equations
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on solving Spinorial Maxwell's Equations as presented in Wald's Chapter 13. The main challenge is demonstrating that the conditions ##\partial^a F_{ab} = 0## and ##\partial_{[a} F_{bc]} = 0## are equivalent to the condition on the spinor ##\phi^{AB}##. A key point raised is the need to show that ##\partial_{AA'} \epsilon_{BC} = 0##, which is suggested to follow from the definition involving derivatives of the antisymmetric tensor. The conversation highlights the independence of the components of ##\epsilon^{\Sigma \Omega}## from spacetime coordinates, leading to zero derivatives. Additionally, it notes that in curved spacetime, a unique connection exists that maintains the zero covariant derivative of ##\epsilon##.
ergospherical
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Education Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
1,100
Reaction score
1,387
I'm trying to figure out how to do these sorts of calculations but I'm having a lot of trouble figuring out where to start. Take problem 3) of Chapter 13 of Wald, i.e. given that a real antisymmetric tensor ##F_{ab}##, corresponding to the spinorial tensor ##F_{AA' BB'}## by the map ##{\sigma^a}_{AA'}##, can be written as\begin{align*}
F_{AA' BB'} = \phi_{AB} \bar{\epsilon}_{A'B'} + \bar{\phi}_{A'B'} \epsilon_{AB}
\end{align*}to show that ##\partial^a F_{ab} = 0## and ##\partial_{[a} F_{bc]} = 0## if and only if ##\phi^{AB}## satisfies ##\partial_{A_1' A_1} \phi^{A_1, \dots, A_n} = 0##. I've really not much idea where to start; the spinor equivalent of the first Maxwell equation should be\begin{align*}
\partial^{AA'} F_{AA'BB'} = \phi_{AB} \partial^{AA'} \bar{\epsilon}_{A'B'} + \bar{\epsilon}_{A'B'} \partial^{AA'} \phi_{AB} + \bar{\phi}_{A'B'} \partial^{AA'} \epsilon_{AB} + \epsilon_{AB} \partial^{AA'} \bar{\phi}_{A'B'} = 0
\end{align*}In the text it's mentioned that ##\partial_{AA'} \epsilon_{BC} = 0##, but no proof is given. Maybe as a starter, how can I show that it follows from the definition ##\partial_{\Lambda \Lambda'} \epsilon_{\Sigma \Omega} = \sum_{\mu} {\sigma^{\mu}}_{\Lambda \Lambda'} \dfrac{\partial \epsilon_{\Sigma \Omega}}{\partial x^{\mu}}##? I reckon its simply because ##\epsilon^{\Sigma \Omega} = o^\Sigma \iota^\Omega - \iota^\Sigma o^\Omega## is independent of the spacetime coordinates, with ##\{o, \iota\}## being a fixed basis of ##W##...?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, the components are constant, so all the derivatives will be zero. In curved space-time you need the theorem that there is a unique connection with the given properties, one of which is that the ##\epsilon## has zero covariant derivative.
 
  • Like
Likes ergospherical
Moderator's note: Spin-off from another thread due to topic change. In the second link referenced, there is a claim about a physical interpretation of frame field. Consider a family of observers whose worldlines fill a region of spacetime. Each of them carries a clock and a set of mutually orthogonal rulers. Each observer points in the (timelike) direction defined by its worldline's tangent at any given event along it. What about the rulers each of them carries ? My interpretation: each...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
946
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
771
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
7K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
5K