Physics Asked by Lil'Gravity on June 5, 2021
I’ve already made a post about this topic here, but I realized that I didn’t understand the explanation on that post. in Chapter 7 of Rindler’s book on relativity, in section about electromagnetic field tensor, he states that
and introducing a factor 1/c for later convenience, we can ‘guess’ the tensor equation, $$ F_mu= frac{q}{c} E_{mu nu} U^nu$$
thereby introducing the electromagnetic field tensor$$E_{mu nu}$$
We would surely want the
force $Fmu$ to be rest-mass preserving, which, according to (6.44) and (7.15), requires
$$F_mu U^mu = 0$$. So we need
$$E_{mu nu} U^mu U^nu = 0$$
for all $ U^mu$ , and hence the antisymmetry of the field tensor
$$E_{mu nu}= −E_{nu mu}$$
.
.
.
I’m really confused about the correct way to show that the equation $E_{mu nu} U^mu U^nu = 0$ implies the fact that $E_{munu}$ is antisymmetric tensor. What is the correct demonstration of this implication?
OBS: i’ve saw some posts answering this kind of question with bilinear maps notation, instead of component notation. If possible, please make some demonstration using the index notation as in the post.
First decompose $E$ as the sum of its symmetric and antisymmetric parts: $$E_{ab} = E_{(ab)} + E_{[ab]}:.$$ Now the idea is to prove that $$E_{(ab)} =0tag{0}$$ so that $E_{ab} = E_{[ab]}$ is antisymmetric.
To this end observe that, in our hypothesis, $$0= E_{ab}U^aU^b = E_{(ab)}U^aU^b + E_{[ab]}U^aU^b:,tag{1}$$ where $$E_{[ab]}U^aU^b= E_{[ba]}U^bU^a= -E_{[ab]}U^bU^a = -E_{[ab]}U^aU^b =0:.$$ Here (1) implies $$E_{(ab)}U^aU^b =0:.tag{2}$$ Writing $U=X+Y$, we have from (2) $$E_{(ab)}X^aX^b + E_{(ab)}Y^aY^b + 2E_{(ab)}X^aY^b=0:.tag{3}$$ where we have used $$E_{(ab)}X^aY^b= E_{(ab)}Y^aX^b$$ as a consequence of the symmetry of $E_{(ab)}$. Using again (2) in (3) for $U=X$ and $U=Y$, we obtain, for every choice of $X$ and $Y$, $$E_{(ab)}X^aY^b=0:.$$ In other words, all matrix elements of the matrix of elements $E_{(ab)}$ vanish, so that $E_{(ab)}=0$ and (0) is true conluding the proof.
Correct answer by Valter Moretti on June 5, 2021
It's probably clearer to go backwards:
$$ E_{munu} = -E_{nu mu} Leftrightarrow E_{munu}U^mu V^nu = -E_{numu}U^mu V^nu hspace{1em} forall U, V Leftrightarrow E_{munu}U^mu V^nu = -E_{munu}U^nu V^mu hspace{1em} forall U, V hspace{1em}text{Relabel RHS} mu leftrightarrow nu Leftrightarrow E_{mu nu} (U^mu + V^mu)(U^nu + V^nu) = 0 hspace{1em} forall U, V $$
Now we recognise that the addition of $V$ in the final equation doesn't actually change the condition, and without losing any generality we may take it to be zero. So, we establish $E_{munu}U^mu U^nu Leftrightarrow E_{munu} = - E_{numu}$
The only property used here is linearity of each tensor.
Answered by catalogue_number on June 5, 2021
Get help from others!
Recent Questions
Recent Answers
© 2024 TransWikia.com. All rights reserved. Sites we Love: PCI Database, UKBizDB, Menu Kuliner, Sharing RPP