Special relativity the EM stress energy tensor

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the stress-energy tensor of the electromagnetic field, specifically focusing on demonstrating that it has zero trace. The original poster attempts to calculate the components of the tensor using the provided expression and is struggling with the summations involved.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss calculating the trace of the stress-energy tensor by multiplying it with the Minkowski metric. There are attempts to understand the implications of the tensor's properties, particularly the antisymmetry of the Faraday tensor and how it affects the trace calculation.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered guidance on how to approach the trace calculation, while others are exploring the definitions and properties of the tensors involved. There is an ongoing examination of the relationship between the trace and the components of the tensors, with no explicit consensus reached yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants are questioning the definitions and properties of the tensors and metrics involved, particularly regarding the interpretation of the trace and the dimensionality of the Minkowski metric. There is also confusion about the relationship between different forms of the metric and their implications for calculations.

peterjaybee
Messages
62
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Using the expression below for the stress energy tensor of the em field, show that it has zero trace.

Homework Equations



[tex]T^{\mu\nu}=F^{\mu}_{ \alpha}F^{\alpha\nu}+\frac{1}{4}\eta^{\mu\nu}F_{\beta\gamma}F^{\beta\gamma}[/tex]

F is the faraday tensor and eta is the minkowski metric.

The Attempt at a Solution



I started by trying to calculate [tex]T^{00}[/tex] with the aim of then calculating the other diagonal components i.e. 11, 22 and 33. But I did not get anywhere. I couldn't get my head around the summations.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, you could definitely solve it that way, but you would be creating a lot of unnecessary work. Think of it this way, the trace of your tensor is given by:

[tex]\eta_{\mu\nu}T^{\mu \nu} = T[/tex]

So just multiply the right side by the minkowski metric. You will also notice that:

[tex]\eta_{\mu \nu} \eta^{\mu \nu} = 4[/tex]

for 4 dimensions (3 space and 1 time).
 
Thanks, for your reply. I think I can get the answer but there is one bit I just don't get. Ill come back to that at the end.

I get
[tex]\eta_{\mu\nu}T^{\mu\nu}=\eta_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu}_{ \alpha}F^{\alpha\nu}+\frac{1}{4}\eta_{\mu\nu}\eta^{\mu\nu}F_{\beta\gamma}F^{\beta\gamma}[/tex]

[tex]=F_{ \nu\alpha}F^{\alpha\nu}+F_{\beta\gamma}F^{\beta\gamma}[/tex]

Then using the antisymetry properties of the faraday tensor this can be written as

[tex]=-F_{\alpha\nu}F^{\alpha\nu}+F_{\beta\gamma}F^{\beta\gamma}[/tex]

This is then zero because the the indicies are being summed over and as such are dummy indicies implying we can change [tex]\beta[/tex] and [tex]\gamma[/tex] to [tex]\alpha[/tex] and [tex]\nu[/tex], thus the LHS goes to zero.

My issue with this is I do not understand why multiplying the stress energy tensor by the metric gives the trace of the metric.

If you had not told me that this gives the trace i would have said that
[tex]\eta_{\mu\nu}T^{\mu\nu}=T_{\nu}^{\nu}[/tex]
which I assume is another matrix as opposed to the trace (i.e. a number).

It is the same with the metric multiplication
[tex]\eta_{\mu\nu}\eta^{\mu\nu}=\eta_{\nu}^{\nu}[/tex]
Again I cannot see how this gives 4.

I think I am missing some key thing in my understanding of the topic that will make this obvious.
 
And [itex]T_{\nu}^{\nu}=T_{0}^{0}+T_{1}^{1}+T_{2}^{2}+T_{3}^{3}[/itex], which is the summation of all diagonal entries, which is the definition of the...?
 
ok, but if that is the case how do you get
[tex]\eta_{\mu\nu}\eta^{\mu\nu}=\eta_{\nu}^{\nu}[/tex]=4

surely because [tex]\eta^{\mu\nu}=diag(1,-1,-1,-1)[/tex]

then

[tex]\eta_{\nu}^{\nu}=-2[/tex]
 
There's a difference between [itex]\eta^{\mu\nu}[/itex] and [itex]\eta^\mu{}_\nu = \eta^{\mu a}\eta_{a\nu}[/itex]. The latter is represented by the identity matrix.
 
See also the first comment in this post, and don't forget the definition of matrix multiplication.
 

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
3K