Understanding Electromagnetism & General Relativity

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of electromagnetism (EM) tensors in the context of General Relativity (GR). Participants explore the mathematical intricacies of using ordinary partial derivatives versus covariant derivatives, the implications of tensor densities for charge density, and the continuity equation in curved spacetime. The conversation includes technical reasoning and mathematical derivations related to these concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the use of ordinary partial derivatives in the definition of the current density Jμ, suggesting that the continuity equation might be coordinate system dependent.
  • Another participant agrees that the use of tensor densities for D and J is critical, although they express uncertainty about the implications of the units involved.
  • A participant attempts to derive a relationship involving the covariant derivative of the EM tensor and expresses difficulty in simplifying the resulting equations.
  • Another participant suggests writing Jμ as a vector density to clarify the continuity equation and explores the implications of this representation.
  • One participant discusses the covariant derivative of the determinant of the metric tensor and its relation to the continuity equation, leading to a conclusion about the behavior of the vector density under differentiation.
  • Another participant confirms the reasoning of a previous post regarding the cancellation of terms in the context of the covariant derivative and the EM tensor.
  • Further exploration of the relationship between the covariant derivative of the determinant of the metric tensor and the Levi-Civita connection is suggested as a useful exercise.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding and agreement on the mathematical relationships discussed, but no consensus is reached on the implications of the continuity equation or the use of tensor densities. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the correctness of certain assumptions and derivations.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about specific mathematical steps and assumptions, particularly regarding the behavior of the covariant derivative of the determinant of the metric tensor and the implications for the continuity equation.

Anypodetos
Messages
17
Reaction score
1
I'm trying to understand how the various EM tensors work in General Relativity. The only source I've found is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell's_equations_in_curved_spacetime, but there are two things I don't get.

Why do they use ordinary partial derivatives instead of covariant ones? It's clear for the definition of Fμν because here the correction terms (Christoffel symbols) cancel, but I don't see how that should work for the definition of Jμ. And further down, the continuity equation is given as ##\partial_μ J^μ =0 ##. Isn't this equation coordinate system dependent? How can this be a law?

The second (possibly related) issue is their use of tensor densities for D and J. This means the time component of J has a dimension of charge per unit cube, whereas using a vector would mean charge per lengh cubed; is that right? Could that somehow fix the problem with the partial derivative? The maths is beyond me, I'm afraid.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Anypodetos said:
I don't see how that should work for the definition of Jμ.

Have you tried working it out?

Anypodetos said:
The second (possibly related) issue is their use of tensor densities for D and J. ... Could that somehow fix the problem with the partial derivative?

Yes. (I'm not sure about your description of the units involved, but the fact that D is a tensor density is critical, yes.)

Anypodetos said:
The maths is beyond me, I'm afraid.

Then you won't be able to see for yourself why it's true, I'm afraid.
 
PeterDonis said:
Have you tried working it out?

Yes. Setting μ0=1, If ##\nabla_μ (F^{μν} \sqrt{-g}) = \partial_μ (F^{μν} \sqrt{-g}) ##, then
$$ (Γ^μ_{αμ} F^{αν} + Γ^ν_{αμ} F^{μα} - Γ^α_{αμ} F^{μν}) \sqrt{-g} =0$$
Then divide by ##\sqrt{-g}##, and then I'm stuck. I tried to express the Γ's by g's, but there doesn't seem to be anything I can eliminate.

Then you won't be able to see for yourself why it's true, I'm afraid.
I meant I can't figure out how to solve this by myself. I do unterstand tensor calculus (hopefully enough of it), so I think I'd be able to work it out given some hints...
 
Anypodetos said:
And further down, the continuity equation is given as ∂μJμ=0∂μJμ=0\partial_μ J^μ =0 . Isn't this equation coordinate system dependent? How can this be a law?
Try writing ##J^\mu = \sqrt{|g|} j^\mu##. Since ##J^\mu## is a vector density of weight one, this will make ##j^\mu## an actual vector. See what you can deduce for ##\partial_\mu J^\mu## from this.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Anypodetos and vanhees71
Orodruin said:
See what you can deduce for ##\partial_\mu J^\mu## from this.
I assumed that the covariant derivative of ##\sqrt{|g|}## vanishes, of which I am not certain (that's the "?").
$$ \partial_μ \left( \sqrt{|g|} j^μ \right) = \sqrt{|g|} \partial_μ j^μ + j^α \partial_α \sqrt{|g|} \overset{?}=
\sqrt{|g|} \partial_μ j^μ + j^α Γ_{μα}^μ \sqrt{|g|} = \sqrt{|g|} (\partial_μ j^μ + Γ_{μα}^μ j^α) = \sqrt{|g|} \nabla_μ j^μ $$
So if ∇ of the vector is zero, so is ∂ of the vector density? Nice!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Sorry to barge in on this thread, but I'm trying to learn GR and tensor analysis and I need all the help I can get. I understand the post above, but I still have some questions about showing that ##\nabla_{\nu}\mathcal{D}^{\mu\nu} = \partial_{\nu}\mathcal{D}^{\mu\nu}##. I get to the same point as Anypodetos in post 3:
$$\Gamma^{\mu}_{\mu\alpha}F^{\alpha\nu}+\Gamma^{\nu}_{\alpha\mu}F^{\mu\alpha} = \Gamma^{\alpha}_{\alpha\mu}F^{\mu\nu} $$
I'm pretty sure the first term on LHS cancels the term on RHS because the index pattern is the same. This leaves ## \Gamma^{\nu}_{\alpha\mu}F^{\mu\alpha} =0##, and I think this is true because of index (anti-)symmetry:
$$\Gamma^{\nu}_{\alpha\mu}F^{\mu\alpha} =\Gamma^{\nu}_{\mu\alpha}F^{\mu\alpha} =-\Gamma^{\nu}_{\mu\alpha}F^{\alpha\mu}$$
Since the pattern of indices is the same, we can replace the dummy indices to get:
$$\Gamma^{\nu}_{\alpha\mu}F^{\mu\alpha}=-\Gamma^{\nu}_{\alpha\mu}F^{\mu\alpha}=0$$
Is my reasoning correct here?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Anypodetos
TeethWhitener said:
Is my reasoning correct here?
Yes, that's right. Thanks for pointing this out!
 
Anypodetos said:
I assumed that the covariant derivative of ##\sqrt{|g|}## vanishes, of which I am not certain (that's the "?").
$$ \partial_μ \left( \sqrt{|g|} j^μ \right) = \sqrt{|g|} \partial_μ j^μ + j^α \partial_α \sqrt{|g|} \overset{?}=
\sqrt{|g|} \partial_μ j^μ + j^α Γ_{μα}^μ \sqrt{|g|} = \sqrt{|g|} (\partial_μ j^μ + Γ_{μα}^μ j^α) = \sqrt{|g|} \nabla_μ j^μ $$
So if ∇ of the vector is zero, so is ∂ of the vector density? Nice!
It is rather simple (and a good exercise) to show that ##\partial_\mu \ln(\sqrt{|g|}) = \Gamma_{\nu\mu}^\nu## for the Levi-Civita connection. This relation is often quite useful.
 
Orodruin said:
It is rather simple (and a good exercise) to show that ##\partial_\mu \ln(\sqrt{|g|}) = \Gamma_{\nu\mu}^\nu## for the Levi-Civita connection. This relation is often quite useful.
Thanks, I'll try to figure that out as time allows...
 
  • #10
Anypodetos said:
Thanks, I'll try to figure that out as time allows...
Oh, and for many purposes, it is easier to write it on the form ##\partial_\mu \sqrt{g} = \sqrt{g} \,\Gamma_{\mu\nu}^\nu## ...
 
  • #11
Orodruin said:
Oh, and for many purposes, it is easier to write it on the form ##\partial_\mu \sqrt{g} = \sqrt{g} \,\Gamma_{\mu\nu}^\nu## ...
I was suspecting that :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K