What is the action for E-M in terms of E & B?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Ankerbrau
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Terms
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the formulation of the action for electromagnetic fields in terms of the electric field (E) and magnetic field (B). Participants explore the implications of expressing the action using these fields, particularly in relation to the equations of motion derived from such an action.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant states that the action for electromagnetism is typically expressed as F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu \nu}, leading to the inhomogeneous Maxwell equations for the 4-potential A_{\mu}.
  • Another participant argues that the canonical variables for electrodynamics are the components of the 4-vector potential and their derivatives, suggesting that E and B cannot serve as canonical variables.
  • A third participant claims that \mathcal{L} = E^2 - B^2 is not a valid Lagrangian density due to the absence of derivatives.
  • One participant questions whether any Lagrangian can be formulated in terms of E and B, regardless of its complexity, and references the Aharonov-Bohm effect to emphasize the primacy of the 4-potential A_{\mu} in physical theory.
  • Another participant asserts that E^2 - B^2 could be considered a valid Lagrangian density but insists that the variational principle must involve the potentials A_{\mu} as canonical variables.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of using E^2 - B^2 as a Lagrangian density. There is no consensus on whether a suitable Lagrangian can be formulated solely in terms of E and B, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the correct formulation.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in using E and B as canonical variables and the necessity of including derivatives in a valid Lagrangian density. The discussion also touches on gauge invariance and the implications of the Aharonov-Bohm effect.

Ankerbrau
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Typically the action for E-M is

[tex]F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu \nu}[/tex]
where
[tex]F_{\mu\nu}=\partial_\mu A_\nu-\partial_\nu A_\mu[/tex]
since the equations of motion for
[tex]A_{\mu}[/tex]
are the inhomogenous Maxwell equations.

However, here comes my problem:
If one expresses this action in terms of the electric and magnetic
field E and B
[tex]F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu \nu}=B^2-E^2[/tex]
the equations of motion for those fields
would be
E=0
and
B=0.

So, where is the trick and what is the correct action
for the fields E and B?

Thanks in advance for your ideas and comments!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The correct canonical variables for electrodynamics are the components of 4-vector potential and their derivatives. Perhaps the best way to see this is to include the Lagrangian for a test particle, which requires coupling the momentum of the particle to the 4-vector potential. It's therefore obvious that the E and B fields cannot be canonical variables. Landau and Lifschitz, The Classical Theory of Fields, is a good reference for this.
 
[itex]\mathcal{L} = E^2 - B^2[/itex] is not a valid Lagrangian density, because it contains no derivatives.
 
Thanks, obviously

[tex]E^2-B^2[/tex] is not the right Lagrangian.
My question was more:
Is there any Lagrangian at all in terms of E and B,
no matter how awkward it looks?

Today a colleague explained me that
experimentally the Aharonov-Bohm effect showed
that the real physical can only be [tex]A_\mu[/tex],
theory wise it is connected to gauge invariant quantities
that do not depend on E and B like
[tex]\int A_\mu dx^\mu[/tex]
 
I would say that [tex]E^2-B^2[/tex] is the right Lagrangian (density), but the variational principle must involve the potentials [tex]A_\mu[/tex] as canonical variables. As I said, if you couple electrodynamics to matter, this is more obviously forced on you.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
966
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K