Stress energy tensor transformation

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the transformation of the energy-momentum tensor when a total derivative is added to the Lagrangian density, specifically ##L \to L + \partial_\mu X^\mu##. The resulting change in the energy-momentum tensor is expressed as ##T^{\mu\nu} \to T^{\mu\nu} + \partial_\alpha B^{\alpha\mu\nu}##, where ##B^{\alpha\mu\nu} = -B^{\mu\alpha\nu}##. Participants highlighted the importance of correctly handling derivatives and emphasized that ##X^\mu## should not depend on derivatives of the field ##\phi## to maintain Lorentz invariance. The transformation's implications for the action and the energy-momentum tensor were also discussed, with suggestions to focus on the action's change rather than the field's specific content.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lagrangian mechanics and field theory
  • Familiarity with the energy-momentum tensor and its derivation
  • Knowledge of Lorentz invariance and total derivatives in field theory
  • Proficiency in tensor calculus and index notation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the energy-momentum tensor from the Lagrangian density
  • Learn about the implications of adding total derivatives to Lagrangian densities
  • Explore the concept of conserved currents in field theory
  • Investigate the role of symmetries in the formulation of physical laws
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, graduate students in physics, and researchers focusing on classical field theory and the principles of Lagrangian mechanics.

BillKet
Messages
311
Reaction score
30

Homework Statement


Show that if you add a total derivative to the Lagrangian density ##L \to L + \partial_\mu X^\mu##, the energy momentum tensor changes as ##T^{\mu\nu} \to T^{\mu\nu}+\partial_\alpha B^{\alpha\mu\nu}## with ##B^{\alpha\mu\nu}=-B^{\mu\alpha\nu}##.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


So we have ##T_{\mu\nu}=\frac{\partial L}{\partial(\partial_\mu \phi)}\partial_\nu \phi-g_{\mu\nu}L##, where ##\phi## is the field that the Lagrangian depends on. If we do the given change on the Lagrangian, the change in ##T_{\mu\nu}## would be ##\frac{\partial (\partial_\alpha X^\alpha)}{\partial(\partial_\mu \phi)}\partial_\nu \phi-g_{\mu\nu}\partial_\alpha X^\alpha =\partial_\alpha \frac{\partial X^\alpha}{\partial(\partial_\mu \phi)}\partial_\nu \phi-g_{\mu\nu}\partial_\alpha X^\alpha##. From here I thought of using this: ##g_{\mu\nu}\partial_\alpha X^\alpha=g_{\mu\nu}\partial_\alpha \phi \frac{\partial X^\alpha}{\partial \phi}## But I don't really know what to do from here. Mainly I don't know how to get rid of that ##g_{\mu\nu}##. Can someone help me?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
BillKet said:
the change in ##T_{\mu\nu}## would be ##\frac{\partial (\partial_\alpha X^\alpha)}{\partial(\partial_\mu \phi)}\partial_\nu \phi-g_{\mu\nu}\partial_\alpha X^\alpha =\partial_\alpha \frac{\partial X^\alpha}{\partial(\partial_\mu \phi)}\partial_\nu \phi-g_{\mu\nu}\partial_\alpha X^\alpha##.

This is not correct. First of all, you are making the assumption that you can just insert ##\partial_\mu X^\mu## in the expression for ##T_{\mu\nu}## and obtain the correct ##T_{\mu\nu}##. This is not so because the expression assumes a dependence only on derivatives up to first order existing in ##L##. If your ##X^\mu## contains any derivatives of ##\phi## (as it would have to to make it Lorentz invariant), then ##\partial_\mu X^\mu## will contain derivatives of second order and higher. Second, you are assuming that
$$
\frac{\partial (\partial_\alpha X^\alpha)}{\partial(\partial_\mu \phi)} = \partial_\alpha \frac{\partial X^\alpha}{\partial(\partial_\mu \phi)},
$$
which is simply not true.

Instead, I suggest that you start from the expression for ##\delta \mathscr S## in terms of the Lagrangian for the transformation ##\delta y^\mu = k^\mu## and ##\delta \phi = 0##, which is what gives the energy-momentum tensor as the current ##J^\mu = T^{\mu}_\nu k^\nu## and takes the form
$$
\delta \mathscr S = \int [\{L(\phi(y-\delta y))-L(\phi(y))\} + \partial_\mu(L \delta y^\mu)] d^4x.
$$

Edit: Also note that you have some errors in your index placements.
Edit 2: You should not have to make any assumptions on the actual field content.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for your reply. So I tried this: $$\frac{\delta(L+\partial_\mu X^\mu)}{\delta y^\nu}=\Big(\frac{\partial L}{\partial \phi}+\frac{\partial(\partial_\mu X^\mu)}{\partial \phi}-\partial_\mu\frac{\partial L}{\partial (\partial_\mu \phi)}-\partial_\mu\frac{\partial (\partial_\mu X^\mu)}{\partial (\partial_\mu \phi)}\Big)\frac{\delta \phi}{\delta y^\nu}+\partial_\mu\Big(\frac{\partial L}{\partial(\partial_\mu\phi)}\frac{\delta \phi}{\delta y^\nu}+\frac{\partial (\partial_\mu X^\mu)}{\partial(\partial_\mu\phi)}\frac{\delta \phi}{\delta y^\nu}\Big)$$ So this is the normal derivation from my book, but with the replacement made to the Lagrangian. We also have $$\frac{\partial L}{\partial \phi}-\partial_\mu\frac{\partial L}{\partial (\partial_\mu \phi)}=0$$ as the field satisfies the equations of motion. Then we have $$\frac{\delta \phi}{\delta y^\nu}=\partial_\nu \phi$$ which is the infinitesimal transformation for a scalar field. As the Lagrangian, even wit the new term, is a scalar field we also have: $$\frac{\delta (L+\partial_\mu X^\mu)}{\delta y^\nu}=\partial_\nu L+\partial_\nu(\partial_\mu X^\mu)$$ Equating the 2 expressions we get:
$$\Big(\frac{\partial(\partial_\mu X^\mu)}{\partial \phi}-\partial_\mu\frac{\partial (\partial_\mu X^\mu)}{\partial (\partial_\mu \phi)}\Big)\partial_\nu\phi+\partial_\mu\Big(\frac{\partial L}{\partial(\partial_\mu\phi)}\partial_\nu\phi+\frac{\partial (\partial_\mu X^\mu)}{\partial(\partial_\mu\phi)}\partial_\nu\phi\Big)=\partial_\nu L+\partial_\nu(\partial_\mu X^\mu)$$ Now from the old stress energy tensor we have $$\frac{\partial L}{\partial(\partial_\mu\phi)}\partial_\nu\phi-g_{\mu\nu}L$$ so the part I need to write in the form $$\partial_\mu (M_{\mu\nu})$$ is what remains from there: $$\Big(\frac{\partial(\partial_\alpha X^\alpha)}{\partial \phi}-\partial_\mu\frac{\partial (\partial_\alpha X^\alpha)}{\partial (\partial_\mu \phi)}\Big)\partial_\nu\phi+\partial_\mu\Big(\frac{\partial (\partial_\alpha X^\alpha)}{\partial(\partial_\mu\phi)}\partial_\nu\phi\Big)=\partial_\nu(\partial_\alpha X^\alpha)$$ I replaced the index for the summation for X with ##\alpha##. Based on what I was told my answer should look like this $$T_{\mu\nu} \to T_{\mu\nu} +\partial_\alpha\Big( \frac{\partial X^\alpha}{\partial(\partial_\mu \phi)}\partial\nu \phi - \frac{\partial X^\mu}{\partial(\partial_\alpha \phi)}\partial_\nu \phi \Big) $$. If we apply the product rule in the second term in our equation, we get rid of one more term and we end up with: $$\Big(\frac{\partial(\partial_\alpha X^\alpha)}{\partial \phi}-\partial_\mu\frac{\partial (\partial_\alpha X^\alpha)}{\partial (\partial_\mu \phi)}\Big)\partial_\nu\phi+\partial_\mu\Big(\frac{\partial (\partial_\alpha X^\alpha)}{\partial(\partial_\mu\phi)}\Big)\partial_\nu\phi+\frac{\partial (\partial_\alpha X^\alpha)}{\partial(\partial_\mu\phi)}\partial_\mu\partial_\nu\phi=\partial_\nu(\partial_\alpha X^\alpha)$$ $$\frac{\partial(\partial_\alpha X^\alpha)}{\partial \phi}\partial_\nu\phi+\frac{\partial (\partial_\alpha X^\alpha)}{\partial(\partial_\mu\phi)}\partial_\mu\partial_\nu\phi=\partial_\nu(\partial_\alpha X^\alpha)$$ Now I am not sure what to do. Is it ok so far? Any suggestions now? Thank you again for help!
 
You really need to stop thinking of the field ##\phi## altogether and start thinking more in terms of how the action changes when you do the ##\delta y^\mu## transformation and how that affects ##\delta L##.

Also note that some of your terms have four ##\mu## indices. That is never a good sign.
 
Orodruin said:
You really need to stop thinking of the field ##\phi## altogether and start thinking more in terms of how the action changes when you do the ##\delta y^\mu## transformation and how that affects ##\delta L##.
Also note that some of your terms have four ##\mu## indices. That is never a good sign.
I am a bit confused, don't I need the ##\phi##, as what I am doing is like a chain rule?
 
BillKet said:
I am a bit confused, don't I need the ##\phi##, as what I am doing is like a chain rule?
No, it is irrelevant what is inside the ##X^\mu## as your transformation of the fields is ##\delta \phi = 0##, all changes in the action will be expressible in terms of ##X^\mu## and its derivatives.
 
Orodruin said:
No, it is irrelevant what is inside the ##X^\mu## as your transformation of the fields is ##\delta \phi = 0##, all changes in the action will be expressible in terms of ##X^\mu## and its derivatives.
I am not sure why the change in ##\phi## is zero. When you derive E-L equations, you actually need ##\delta \phi## to be non-zero.
 
BillKet said:
I am not sure why the change in ##\phi## is zero. When you derive E-L equations, you actually need ##\delta \phi## to be non-zero.
I am not talking about the equations of motion, I am talking about the 1-parameter symmetry related to the conserved current that is the energy-momentum tensor contracted with the spacetime translation vector ##k^\nu##, i.e., ##J^\mu = T^\mu_\nu k^\nu##.
 
Orodruin said:
You really need to stop thinking of the field ##\phi## altogether and start thinking more in terms of how the action changes when you do the ##\delta y^\mu## transformation and how that affects ##\delta L##.

Also note that some of your terms have four ##\mu## indices. That is never a good sign.
Ok, so for the change in action we have: $$\frac{\delta S}{\delta y^\mu}=\int(\frac{\delta L}{\delta y^\mu}+\frac{\delta \partial_\alpha X^\alpha }{\delta y^\mu})$$ And the first term gives the old result. Is this ok so far?
 
  • #10
Orodruin said:
I am not talking about the equations of motion, I am talking about the 1-parameter symmetry related to the conserved current that is the energy-momentum tensor contracted with the spacetime translation vector ##k^\nu##, i.e., ##J^\mu = T^\mu_\nu k^\nu##.
Any further hint would be greatly appreciated
 
  • #11
Did you get any constraints on the form of ##X^\mu##? I suggest that you do the case where ##X^\mu## is a function of the fields only (and not derivatives of the fields). If ##X^\mu## depends on the field derivatives, then ##\partial_\mu X^\mu## will depend on the second derivatives of the fields.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
7K