Why electromagnetic tensor (Faraday 2-form) is exact? (and not closed)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the nature of the electromagnetic field tensor, specifically the Faraday 2-form F, and its classification as an exact differential form. It is established that F is defined as F = dA, where A is a 1-form, making F exact locally due to the Poincaré lemma. However, the conversation highlights that not all closed forms are exact globally, with examples such as the potential vortex demonstrating that F can be closed but not exact in multiply connected regions. The relationship between closed and exact forms is clarified, emphasizing that while F is closed globally, it is not necessarily exact outside local contexts.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of differential forms and their properties
  • Familiarity with the Poincaré lemma in differential geometry
  • Knowledge of Maxwell's equations and their mathematical representations
  • Basic concepts of Ricci calculus and notation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of the Poincaré lemma in various topological spaces
  • Explore the relationship between closed and exact forms in differential geometry
  • Investigate examples of electromagnetic fields in multiply connected regions
  • Learn about the mathematical formulation of Maxwell's equations in different coordinate systems
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, mathematicians, and students of theoretical physics who are interested in the mathematical foundations of electromagnetism and differential geometry.

phoenix95
Gold Member
Messages
81
Reaction score
23
Following from Wikipedia, the covariant formulation of electromagnetic field involves postulating an electromagnetic field tensor(Faraday 2-form) F such that
F=dA
where A is a 1-form, which makes F an exact differential form. However, is there any specific reason for expecting F to be exact? Could it be the case that in general, F is a closed differential form, but by virtue of the Poincare lemma we define F to be this way?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That's just the homogeneous Maxwell equations, ##\mathrm{d} F=0##. In Ricci-calculus notation that's
$$\partial_{\mu} ^{\dagger} F^{\mu \nu}=\partial_{\mu} \frac{1}{2} \epsilon^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma} F_{\rho \sigma}=0.$$
The Poincare lemma tells you that (at least locally) ##F=\mathrm{d} A## or, in Ricci notation,
$$F_{\mu \nu}=\partial_{\mu} A_{\nu}-\partial_{\nu} A_{\mu}.$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: phoenix95
vanhees71 said:
That's just the homogeneous Maxwell equations, ##\mathrm{d} F=0##. In Ricci-calculus notation that's
$$\partial_{\mu} ^{\dagger} F^{\mu \nu}=\partial_{\mu} \frac{1}{2} \epsilon^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma} F_{\rho \sigma}=0.$$
The Poincare lemma tells you that (at least locally) ##F=\mathrm{d} A## or, in Ricci notation,
$$F_{\mu \nu}=\partial_{\mu} A_{\nu}-\partial_{\nu} A_{\mu}.$$
Thanks for the reply. I understood that. But as much as I know, not all closed forms are exact (although all exact forms are closed). So is there a specific reason why we always write F=dA? In other words, just because it is closed why do we expect it to be exact?

In your answer, you wrote F=dA at least locally right? So am I right in saying that the differential 2-form F, in general, is not exact globally (although we both agree that F has to be closed globally)?
 
Well, there are examples like the "potential vortex", where you have a multiply connected region, where you have ##\text{curl} \vec{B}=0## everywhere except along an arbitrary infinite line (e.g., along the ##3##-axis of a Cartesian coordinate system) and
$$\vec{B}=\frac{C}{x^2+y^2} \begin{pmatrix}-y \\x \\ 0 \end{pmatrix},$$
which has
$$\int_{K} \mathrm{d} \vec{r} \vec{B}=2 \pi C N$$
for any closed curve ##K##, which winds ##N## times around the ##z##-axis.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: phoenix95

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K