Electromagnetic Field Tensor in Curvilinear Coordinates

Electromagnetic Field Tensor in Curvilinear Coordinates
User Name
User Name
Remember Me?
Password
Log in

6589787dfd375bc9 guest login

curvilinear coordinates (t,,,) with
metric tensor as follows:

2
0
2
1
2
2
2
3
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
h
h
n
h
h
v
(
(
(
=
(

Jul6-12, 12:13 PM Electromagnetic Field Tensor in Curvilinear Coordinates
#1

How do we express electromagnetic field tensor F in terms of E ,E ,E ,B
,B ,B

I found in the internet that the F is given by:
F = 0 E h 0 h 1 E h 0 h 2 E h 0 h 3 E h 0 h 1 0 B h 1 h 2 B
h 3 h 1 E h 0 h 2 B h 1 h 2 0 B h 2 h 3 E h 0 h 3 B h 3 h
1 B h 2 h 3 0

Is it correct and how to derive it?

Thanks.

ngkamsengpeter
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by ngkamsengpeter
PhysOrg.com

#2

Posts: 270 This is easily done using tetrads. There is a tetrad matrix h a b that converts
back and forth between the tetrad basis (which lives in a flat space) and the
coordinate basis.

Let x b =h a b x a , where the tilde denotes a coordinate component, instead of
a tetrad component. You can see that h 0 0 is your h 0 and so on.

The Faraday tensor in the tetrad basis is just the usual smattering of electric and
magnetic field components:

0 1 0 2 0 3
0 1 1 2 3 1
0 2 1 2 2 3
0 3 3 1 2 3
0
0
0
0
E E
E
h h h h h h
B B
E
h h h h h h
F
E B
B
h h h h h h
E B
B
h h h h h h
|
o
|
o
v
|
o
|
o
(

(
(
(
(
(
=
(
(
(
(
(
(

2
2
0
0
0
0
r
r
ab
r
r
E rE rsin E
E rB rsin B
F
rE rB r sin B
rsin E rsin B r sin B
u |
| u
u |
| u
u
u
u
u u u
(
(

(
=
(
(

Just act on the tetrad EM tensor F ab with the tetrad field to convert it into the
coordinate basis: F cd =h a c h b d F ab . Mind all the usual subtleties of index
notation--h a b is the inverse transpose of h a b . Or I think it is. I'm not too
confident when it comes to index notation myself. The notation is easier (in my
mind) to understand in a geometric algebra form, as is the physical nature of the
EM tensor.

Muphrid
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Muphrid
Jul7-12, 11:16 AM Re: Electromagnetic Field Tensor in Curvilinear Coordinates
#3
ApplePion

Posts: 115 It's a little unclear what you are sayin/asking.

The components of the Fuv tensor still match E and B the same way would in a
Minkowski space, so that formula is not correct for what you are actually asking.

What seems to be going on is they are saying that if you right the Fuv tensor in
terms of the E's and B's for a Minkowski situation, if you make a coordinate
transformation to a situation where the metric is what you gave, the new Fuv
tensor in terms of the *old* E's and B's (not the new E's and B's) will be of the
form they gave.

There actually is still a problem in that the coordinate transformation to go for one
metric to another is not unique. There is a degeneracy because the Lorentz
transformation (and its generalization for non-Minkowskian situations) leaves the
metric unchanged. So for example, suppose we have a situation where we have a
Minkowski metric, and just an electric field with no magnetic field. Suppose we
made a Lorentz Transformation (boost). We now have a different Fuv because
there is now a magnetic field. But the metric is unchanged. So if, for example, you
make a transformation from a situation with a non-Minkowski metric to one where
the metric is Minkoskian, the Fuv is not really uniquely determined, because
different coordinate transformations (resuling in different Fuv tensors) can produce
the same Minkoski metric endpoint.

ApplePion
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by ApplePion
#4
ngkamsengpeter

Posts: 167 Originally Posted by Muphrid
This is easily done using tetrads. There is a tetrad matrix h a b that converts back
and forth between the tetrad basis (which lives in a flat space) and the coordinate
basis.

Let x b =h a b x a , where the tilde denotes a coordinate component, instead of
a tetrad component. You can see that h 0 0 is your h 0 and so on.

The Faraday tensor in the tetrad basis is just the usual smattering of electric and
magnetic field components:
F ab = 0 E 1 E 2 E 3 E 1 0 B 3 B 2 E 2 B 3 0 B 1 E 3 B 2
B 1 0

Just act on the tetrad EM tensor F ab with the tetrad field to convert it into the
coordinate basis: F cd =h a c h b d F ab . Mind all the usual subtleties of index
notation--h a b is the inverse transpose of h a b . Or I think it is. I'm not too
confident when it comes to index notation myself. The notation is easier (in my
mind) to understand in a geometric algebra form, as is the physical nature of the
EM tensor.
Thanks. But I am new to this tetrad thing. How to calculate the h a b actually?
From x b =h a b x a I would think that h a b is a transformation matrix which
seems to be incorrect. Can you give me an example how to calculate the h a b ,
for example in cylindrical coordinates.

Thanks.

ngkamsengpeter
View Public Profile
#5
ngkamsengpeter

Posts: 167 Originally Posted by ApplePion
It's a little unclear what you are sayin/asking.

The components of the Fuv tensor still match E and B the same way would in a
Minkowski space, so that formula is not correct for what you are actually asking.

What seems to be going on is they are saying that if you right the Fuv tensor in
terms of the E's and B's for a Minkowski situation, if you make a coordinate
transformation to a situation where the metric is what you gave, the new Fuv
tensor in terms of the *old* E's and B's (not the new E's and B's) will be of the
form they gave.

There actually is still a problem in that the coordinate transformation to go for one
metric to another is not unique. There is a degeneracy because the Lorentz
transformation (and its generalization for non-Minkowskian situations) leaves the
metric unchanged. So for example, suppose we have a situation where we have a
Minkowski metric, and just an electric field with no magnetic field. Suppose we
made a Lorentz Transformation (boost). We now have a different Fuv because
there is now a magnetic field. But the metric is unchanged. So if, for example, you
make a transformation from a situation with a non-Minkowski metric to one where
the metric is Minkoskian, the Fuv is not really uniquely determined, because
different coordinate transformations (resuling in different Fuv tensors) can produce
the same Minkoski metric endpoint.
I am refering to this paper at http://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0409025.pdf . In
the paper, the author write out the field tensor in spherical coordinates in terms of
E r ,E E ,B r ,B B . I wonder how the author derived that and how to
write it in more general curvilinear coordinates.

ngkamsengpeter
View Public Profile
Jul7-12, 12:32 PM #6
Muphrid

Posts: 270 Originally Posted by ngkamsengpeter
Thanks. But I am new to this tetrad thing. How to calculate the h a b actually?
From x b =h a b x a I would think that h a b is a transformation matrix which
seems to be incorrect. Can you give me an example how to calculate the h a b ,
for example in cylindrical coordinates.

Thanks.
The tetrad field obeys g ab =h a c h cb . This makes it like a square root of the
metric. Ideally, you'd be given the tetrad field instead of the metric, but in this
case, your metric is diagonal, so the easiest tetrad field to pick is just the square
root of the metric's corresponding elements.

To compute the tetrad field would require some information about the geometry.
Do you mean compute the flat space tetrad for some curvilinear coordinates?

Muphrid
View Public Profile
Jul7-12, 01:14 PM Re: Electromagnetic Field Tensor in Curvilinear Coordinates
#7
ApplePion

Posts: 115 Muprid, there is not a unique tetrad to go from one metric to a
new metric in a new coordinate system. There are an infinite number of tetrasds
that will do it, each differing from eachother by a (generalized) Lorentz
Transformation.

ApplePion
View Public Profile
#8
Muphrid

Posts: 270 Indeed, the metric in invariant under generalized rotations while
the tetrad isn't.

Muphrid
View Public Profile
#9
ApplePion

Posts: 115 ngkamsengpeter, the force law is

m (d2xu/ds2) [u index is up] = q Fuv [u index up and v index down] Jv [ index is
up]

It appears that he is writing it out in a way that makes it glaring that curvilinear
coordinates are used by putting it in the form

m (d2xu/ds2) [u index is up] = q Fus [u index up and s index up] gsv [both
indices down] Jv [ index is up]

and then is putting the two terms q Fus [u index up and s index up] gsv [both
indices down] together.

I don't think it is a good way to express it.

ApplePion
View Public Profile
#10
ngkamsengpeter

The tetrad field obeys g ab =h a c h cb . This makes it like a square root of the
metric. Ideally, you'd be given the tetrad field instead of the metric, but in this
case, your metric is diagonal, so the easiest tetrad field to pick is just the square
root of the metric's corresponding elements.

To compute the tetrad field would require some information about the geometry.
Do you mean compute the flat space tetrad for some curvilinear coordinates?
How to derive this equation g ab =h a c h cb ? Yes. In flat space, how to write the
F in curvilinear coordinates. Given the equation F cd =h a c h b d F ab ,
how to compute the flat space tetrad for some curvilinear coordinates? For
example, in flat space cylindrical coordinates, the metric tensor is diag(1,-1,-r^2,-
1), so the tetrad is just square root of this metric tensor?

And I am not quite understand what ApplePion is saying, can anyone of you
explain in more details?

Thanks.

ngkamsengpeter
View Public Profile
#11
Muphrid

Posts: 270 Okay, so there are a couple things going on here.

I won't prove the relation between metric and tetrad; it's a bit involved, really.

Calculating the flat space tetrad is easy. Take the equations that convert from your
coordinates to Cartesian and find the Jacobian matrix. This is the tetrad field in flat
space.

Muphrid
View Public Profile
#12
ngkamsengpeter

Okay, so there are a couple things going on here.

I won't prove the relation between metric and tetrad; it's a bit involved, really.

Calculating the flat space tetrad is easy. Take the equations that convert from your
coordinates to Cartesian and find the Jacobian matrix. This is the tetrad field in flat
space.
Let me try an example in cylindrical coordinates, the jacobian matrix I found for
transform (t,x,y,z) to (t,r,,z) is
J= 0 0 0 0 0 cos sin 0 0 rsin rcos 0 0 0 0 0

So J is the tetrad field? But how to apply to F cd =h a c h b d F ab ? I cannot
get rid of the cos and sin term.

Thanks.

ngkamsengpeter
View Public Profile
#13
Muphrid

Posts: 270 Hm, I think I see now that this is really just a problem about
going between the coordinate basis and the orthonormal basis. The only reason
the factors of h 0 ,h 1 , need to appear in your EM tensor is if the electric and
magnetic fields are components corresponding to unit vectors where the EM
tensor's components do not. Is that what you're trying to do?

Muphrid
View Public Profile
#14
ngkamsengpeter

Hm, I think I see now that this is really just a problem about going between the
coordinate basis and the orthonormal basis. The only reason the factors of h 0 ,h
1 , need to appear in your EM tensor is if the electric and magnetic fields are
components corresponding to unit vectors where the EM tensor's components do
not. Is that what you're trying to do?
What I am trying to do is reproduce the field tensor in spherical coordinates shown
in the paper http://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0409025.pdf at equation 15 which
is:
F ab = 0 E r rE rsinE E r 0 rB rsinB rE rB 0
r 2 sinB r rsinE rsinB r 2 sinB r 0

Yes. I think it is just the problem of changing coordinate basis but I am new to this
so dont exactly know how to do this. What I am trying to do is reproduce the field
tensor in spherical coordinates as shown above and also in cylindrical coordinates.

Thanks.

ngkamsengpeter
View Public Profile
#15
Muphrid

Posts: 270 Yeah, I think this has to do with the difference between how
we usually do things in vector calculus--using unit vectors--with how things are
done in GR, using non-unit coordinate basis vectors because things are
generalized. Really, all you're seeing here is the difference between the two. For
example, look at the rE component. This arises just because the coordinate
basis vector g has magnitude 1/r . E describes the g =rg component of
the electric field, but the EM tensor expects the g component.

This is my distinct impression, at least. I too would appreciate any clarification
others can provide.

Muphrid
View Public Profile
#16
Mentz114

Posts: 3,226
Blog Entries: 5
Recognitions:
PF Contributor The problem is that changing from rectilinear coordinates to spherical
polar coords is not a linear transformation. To express F
mn
in new coordinates might
require going back to
F mn = m A n n A m

transforming the potential, and using the appropriate differential operators.

[Edit]
I had occassion to find F in cylindrical coords (t,z,r,) some time ago, and I see
that for A
0
being a function of z,r, I used the operator (1/r
2
) . This F gave the
correct EMT.

Mentz114
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Mentz114
View Blog

Page 1 of 2 1 2 >

Share it
Facebook it!
Twitter it!
Slashdot it!
Digg it!
StumbleUpon it!
del.icio.us it!
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version
Email this Page

Similar Threads for: Electromagnetic Field Tensor in Curvilinear
Coordinates
Thread Forum Replies
Electromagnetic tensor in cylindrical coordinates Special & General Relativity 15
What kind of tensor is the electromagnetic field tensor? Special & General Relativity 3

Help with metric tensor in curvilinear coordinates on boundary Topology & Geometry 0
Rank 3 tensor created by taking the derivative of electromagnetic field tensor Advanced Physics 1
Tensor analysis in curvilinear coordinates Topology & Geometry 2

Mark Forums ReadHome - Archive - Top
Powered by vBulletin Copyright 2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. 2012 Physics Forums
| Physorg.com Science News Partner

Electromagnetic Field Tensor in Curvilinear Coordinates

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Electromagnetic Field Tensor in Curvilinear Coordinates

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Electromagnetic Field Tensor in Curvilinear Coordinates

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi