Variation of the action using tensor algebra.

  • #1

Homework Statement



Hi, I have a problem calculating the variation of the action using tensor algebra because two derivative indices are causing some problem.

Homework Equations



Generally you have the action [itex]S = \int L(A^{\mu}, A^{\mu}_{\;,\nu}, x^{\mu})d^4x [/itex]
where:
[itex] A ^{\mu}= A^{\mu}(x^{\nu}) [/itex]
[itex] A ^{\mu}_{\;,\nu} = \frac{\partial A^{\mu}}{\partial x^{\nu}} [/itex]
[itex] x^{\nu} = (x^0, x^1, x^2 ,x^3) [/itex]
[itex] d^{4}x = dx^0 dx^1dx^2dx^3 [/itex]

Would I be correct in stating that the variation of the action is [itex] \delta S = \int ( \frac{\partial L}{\partial A^{\mu} } \delta A^{\mu} + \frac{\partial L}{\partial A ^{\mu}_{\;,\nu} } \delta A ^{\mu}_{\;,\nu} ) d^{4} x [/itex] ?

The Attempt at a Solution



Say that our function L looks like this:
[itex] L = A_{\mu, \nu}-A_{\nu, \mu} [/itex]
where [itex] A_{\mu} = \eta _{\mu \nu} A^{\nu} [/itex] and [itex] \eta_{\mu \nu} [/itex] is the Minkowski metric tensor.
How do I make sense of this in context of the variation [itex]\delta S[/itex] above? More specifically what should the derivative index of the variation [itex] \delta A^{\mu}[/itex] be? Because L is the [itex]\nu[/itex] derivative of [itex]A_{\mu}[/itex] minus [itex]A_{\nu}[/itex] derivated with respect to the [itex]\mu[/itex] derivative.
Specifically what I want to accomplish is to rewrite the right hand side of [itex]\delta S[/itex] as the sum of two parts that looks something like this
[itex]\frac{\partial L}{\partial A_{\mu , \nu} } \delta A_{\mu, \nu}=\frac{\partial }{\partial x^{\nu}} (\frac{\partial L}{\partial A_{\mu,\nu}} \delta A_{\mu})-\delta A_{\mu} \frac{\partial }{\partial x^{\nu}}( \frac{\partial L}{\partial A_{\mu,\nu}}) [/itex] but for me to be able to do that I need a common derivative index in L which I don't have. I have two separate derivative indexes and I have not idea what to do with them. Thank you for your help.

I know the equations are physically nonsensical since I have removed all the clutter beside the actual problem, so this is mainly a mathematical question. I could not decide whether it should be in the Physics section or Math section. If a moderator think it should be moved somewhere else please feel free to do it there or tell me and I'll do it later.
 
Last edited:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
vanhees71
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
2019 Award
15,986
7,291
Your Lagrangian doesn't make sense, because it's a 2nd-rank tensor but should be a scalar (density). The action for the free em. field in Heaviside-Lorentz units with [itex]c=1[/itex] reads
[tex]\mathcal{L}=-\frac{1}{4} F_{\mu \nu} F^{\mu \nu},[/tex]
where
[tex]F_{\mu \nu}=\partial_{\mu} A_{\nu} - \partial_{\nu} A_{\mu}.[/tex]
Then you can use the antisymmetry of this tensor to write
[tex]\delta \mathcal{L}=-\frac{1}{2} F^{\mu \nu} \delta F_{\mu \nu}=-F^{\mu \nu} \partial_{\mu} \delta A_{\nu},[/tex]
where I've also taken into account that in the Hamilton principle the space-time variables are not varied, i.e., that [itex]\delta (\partial_{\mu} A_{\nu})=\partial_{\mu} \delta A_{\nu}[/itex].
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #3
Thank you! It did not answer what I was looking for but it still helped in another way. Which is good since my question, as you pointed out was badly phrased. I will try and derive the result you posted as I cannot see the connection by just looking at it.

Regarding my original question. It does not have to be related to the Lagrangian. If you think of L as just some 2nd rank tensor, would it make more sense then or is there some other error which makes the expression illegal even if one just rewrites [itex] \delta S \rightarrow \delta S^{\mu \nu} [/itex]?

Another question, my teacher did this on the whiteboard some lecture ago without motivation.
[itex] \frac{\partial F_{\mu \nu}}{\partial A^{\mu}_{\;,\nu}} = \frac{\partial F_{\mu \nu}}{\partial A_{\mu, \nu}} [/itex]

Is this true generally for any function or only in the case where A is the 4-potential and F is Maxwell field tensor?

*edit*

I managed to solve the problem. Thank you for the help! But the question above still stands :)
 
Last edited:

Related Threads on Variation of the action using tensor algebra.

  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
0
Views
822
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
984
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
942
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
2K
Top