Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I have a question in David Tong's Example Sheet 4 Problem 5b, how to verify the last equation (*) on p.2? (There is a solution for example sheet 3, but seems to be no solution for example sheet 4.)

Problem 5b:

Show that the equations of motion arising from the Born-Infeld action are equivalent to the beta function condition for the open string,
$$\beta_\sigma\left(F\right)=\left( \frac{1} {1 -F^2} \right)^{\mu \rho}\partial_\mu F_{\rho\sigma }=0 $$ Note: To do this, it will prove very useful if you can first show the following results:
$$∂_μ\left[\operatorname{tr} \ln(1 − F^2)\right] = −4 ∂_\rho F_{μ\sigma}\left(\frac{F}{1-F^2}\right)^{\sigma \rho } $$

which requires use of the Bianchi identity for $F_{\mu \nu }$ and

$$ \tag{*} \begin{align} \partial _\mu \left( \frac{ F}{1-F^2} \right)^{\mu\nu} &= \left( \frac{ F}{1-F^2} \right)^{\mu\rho} \partial_\mu F_{\rho\sigma} \left( \frac{ F}{1-F^2} \right)^{\sigma \nu} \\ &\qquad+ \left( \frac{1} {1 -F^2} \right)^{\mu \rho} \partial_\mu F_{\rho\sigma}\left( \frac{ 1 }{1-F^2} \right)^{\sigma \nu} \end{align}$$

In addition, as given in question 5a

$$F_{\mu\nu} = \partial_{\mu} A_{\nu} - \partial_{\nu} A_{\mu} $$

My attempt to prove the problem:

LHS $$\partial_{\mu} \left( \frac{ F}{1-F^2} \right)^{\mu\nu} = \partial_{\mu} \left[ F^{\mu}_{\alpha} \left( \frac{1}{1-F^2} \right)^{\alpha \nu} \right] = \left( \partial_{\mu} F^{\mu}_{\alpha} \right) \left( \frac{1}{1 -F^2} \right)^{\alpha \nu} + F^{\mu}_{\alpha} \partial_{\mu} \left( \frac{1}{1 -F^2} \right)^{\alpha \nu} \tag{1} $$

Using the formula in matrix cookbook for the derivative of inverse matrix, Eq. (53)

Eq. (1) becomes $$\left( \partial_{\mu} F^{\mu}_{\alpha} \right) \left( \frac{1}{1 -F^2} \right)^{\alpha \nu} + 2 F^{\mu}_{\alpha} \left[ \frac{1}{1 -F^2} \left( \partial_{\mu} F \right) F \frac{1}{1-F^2} \right]^{\alpha \nu} $$
$$= \left( \partial_{\mu} F^{\mu}_{\alpha} \right) \left( \frac{1}{1 -F^2} \right)^{\alpha \nu} + 2 \left( \frac{F}{1 -F^2} \right)^{\mu \rho} \left( \partial_{\mu} F \right)_{\rho\sigma} \left(\frac{F}{1-F^2}\right)^{\sigma \nu} \tag{2} $$

The second term in Eq.(2) cancels the second term in the RHS in the problem sheet equation. We then need to show $$ \left( \partial_{\mu} F^{\mu}_{\alpha} \right) \left( \frac{1}{1 -F^2} \right)^{\alpha \nu} + \left( \frac{F}{1 -F^2} \right)^{\mu \rho} \left( \partial_{\mu} F \right)_{\rho\sigma} \left(\frac{F}{1-F^2}\right)^{\sigma \nu} - \left( \frac{1}{1 -F^2} \right)^{\mu \rho} \left( \partial_{\mu} F \right)_{\rho\sigma} \left(\frac{1}{1-F^2}\right)^{\sigma \nu} =0 \tag{3} $$

then I didn't find a way to show Eq. (3) hold. I tried to combine the second and third term, and rearrange them, but didn't got a simple expression.

share|cite|improve this question
I think I proved it, I'll write an answer, 1 second... – centralcharge Sep 1 '13 at 2:36
Ok done. (18 minutes, though; instead of 1 second)... Nice "matrix cookbook", by the wayy. – centralcharge Sep 1 '13 at 2:54
Comment to the question (v1): It would be good if OP (or somebody else?) could try to make the question formulation self-contained, so one doesn't have to open the link to understand the question. – Qmechanic Sep 1 '13 at 7:02
@Qmechanic: Ok, done. – centralcharge Sep 1 '13 at 7:31
@DImension10AbhimanyuPS note the inclusion of a crucial omitted factor. – Emilio Pisanty Sep 1 '13 at 11:18
up vote 2 down vote accepted

$\partial_i \frac{F}{1-F^2}=-(\frac{F}{1-F^2})\partial_i (\frac{1-F^2}{F})(\frac{F}{1-F^2})$


$=-(\frac{F}{1-F^2})(\partial_i(\frac{1}{F}) -\partial_iF)(\frac{F}{1-F^2})$

$=-(\frac{F}{1-F^2})(- \frac{1}{F}\partial_i F \frac{1}{F}) -\partial_iF)(\frac{F}{1-F^2})$

$=(\frac{1}{1-F^2})\partial_i F(\frac{1}{1-F^2}) + (\frac{F}{1-F^2})\partial_i F(\frac{F}{1-F^2})$

share|cite|improve this answer

Eq. ($\ast$) in David Tong's notes follows from the more general eq. ($\ast\ast$)

$$\tag{**}\begin{align} \partial_{\mu}\left(\frac{F}{1-F^2}\right)^{\lambda}{}_{\nu} &=\left(\frac{F}{1-F^2}\right)^{\lambda}{}_{\rho} ~\partial_{\mu}F^{\rho}{}_{\sigma} \left(\frac{F}{1-F^2}\right)^{\sigma}{}_{\nu} \\ &\qquad+\left(\frac{1}{1-F^2}\right)^{\lambda}{}_{\rho} ~\partial_{\mu} F^{\rho}{}_{\sigma} \left(\frac{1}{1-F^2}\right)^{\sigma}{}_{\nu} \end{align}$$

by putting the $\lambda$-index equal to the $\mu$-index, sum over $\mu$, and raise the $\nu$-index. Eq. ($\ast\ast$) is equivalent to eq. ($\ast\ast\ast$)

$$\tag{***}\begin{align} \partial_{\mu}\left(\frac{F}{1-F^2}\right) &=\left(\frac{F}{1-F^2}\right) \partial_{\mu}F \left(\frac{F}{1-F^2}\right) \\ &\qquad+\left(\frac{1}{1-F^2}\right) \partial_{\mu} F \left(\frac{1}{1-F^2}\right), \end{align}$$

if we implicitly imply that every matrix $F$ carries one upper and one lower index a la $F^{\lambda}{}_{\nu}$. (Note that that there is no ambiguity in writing the matrix expression $\frac{F}{1-F^2}$ as a fraction because the numerator and the denominator commute.)

Finally, eq. ($\ast\ast\ast$) follows by straightforward manipulations, which involve e.g. using the rule

$$\tag{****} \partial_{\mu}\frac{1}{M}~=~-\frac{1}{M}\partial_{\mu}M\frac{1}{M} $$

of how to differentiate an inverse matrix $M$. (In particular, the Bianchi identity that David Tong mentions is not used in the proof of eq. ($\ast\ast\ast$).)

share|cite|improve this answer
Thanks for your answer. Excuse me, I tried to use the matrix derivative in my attempt, as Eq. $(****)$ also in the matrix cookbook Eq. (53), and my Eq. (2) is not the same as (****). What is the reason for that? – user26143 Sep 1 '13 at 18:36
It is solved in Trimok's answer, stupid me :( – user26143 Sep 1 '13 at 18:52
Trimok's answer (v2) shows the manipulations that establishes eq. (***). – Qmechanic Sep 1 '13 at 21:26


Non-Rigorous Proof

It's pretty simple algebraic manipulation, it seems. If we let


$$n=\partial_\mu F$$

(Letting the indices take care of themselves... You can imagine them "cancelling" out implicitly...)

The statement reduces to:


Which is equivalent to


Since $k=\frac{1}{1-F^2}$, we see that this is the same as saying that


Which is certainly true!...

Rigorous proof

You can also prove it rigorously as follows:

$$\begin{gathered} {\left( {\frac{F}{{1 - {F^2}}}} \right)^{\mu \rho }}{\left( {{\partial _\mu }F} \right)_{\rho \sigma }}{\left( {\frac{F}{{1 - {F^2}}}} \right)^{\sigma \nu }} = {\left( {{F^2} - 1} \right)^{\sigma \nu }}{\left( {\frac{1}{{1 - {F^2}}}} \right)^{\mu \rho }}{\left( {{\partial _\mu }F} \right)_{\rho \sigma }} + {\left( {\frac{1}{{1 - {F^2}}}} \right)^{\mu \rho }}{\left( {{\partial _\mu }F} \right)_{\rho \sigma }} = {\left( {\frac{1}{{1 - {F^2}}}} \right)^{\mu \rho }}{\left( {{\partial _\mu }F} \right)_{\rho \sigma }}{\left( {\frac{1}{{1 - {F^2}}}} \right)^{\sigma \nu }} - {\partial _\mu }F_\alpha ^\mu {\left( {\frac{1}{{1 - {F^2}}}} \right)^{\alpha \nu }} \\ \\ \end{gathered} $$

Comments (I'll sort out the formatting later.)

@user26143 : F does not commute with ∂μF, and one may demonstrate your formula only from the formula (53) of the matrix cookbook. – Trimok 16 hours ago

@Trimok, Excuse me, (53) in the matrix cookbook implies anticommuting relation, but not commuting. If I write [Fαβ,∂μFγδ], by Fαβ=∂αAβ−∂βAα and computing the eight terms after expanding the commutator, it seems to be zero. Or am I mistaken? – user26143 14 hours ago

@user26143 : For a general classical matrix F(x), ∂μF(x) does not commute with F(x). Here I have supposed that F(x)μν=Fμν(x) represents classical fields. – Trimok 14 hours ago

@user26143 : In the non-rigourous part of the answer, it is supposed that n and F commute, but it is not correct. – Trimok 14 hours ago

@Trimok, OK. I will edit the post ASAP, that in problem 5a Fμν=∂μAν−∂νAμ. – user26143 14 hours ago

@user26143 : I have a counterexample : By taking Ay=x2/2,Az=y, I found that the matrices F and ∂xF do not commute. – Trimok 14 hours ago

@user26143 : I must leave now. If you agree with me, I will provide an answer. If I am mistaken, you will tell me. – Trimok 14 hours ago

@Trimok Thank you very much! What is Ax in your example? I have to leave too, sorry – user26143 14 hours ago

@user26143 : A0=0,Ax=0,Ay=x2/2,Az=y , F=⎛⎝⎜⎜000000−x00x0−10010⎞⎠⎟⎟, ∂xF=⎛⎝⎜⎜000000−1001000000⎞⎠⎟⎟ – Trimok 11 hours ago

@Trimok, I agree with your counterexample. I cannot use [Fαβ,∂μFγδ]=0 to infer [F,∂μF]=0. I am grateful to see your approach, at least any hint – user26143 10 hours ago

@user26143 : I gave an answer – Trimok 10 hours ago

@Trimok, Thanks a lot!! I didn't think about the inverse of A/B – user26143 10 hours ago 1

@user26143 : you must be careful, there is an ambiguity with AB, because it could be B−1A or AB−1, and BA,could be A−1B or BA−1. However, in your case, it works in all cases, that is the inverse of F1−F2 is 1−F2F, whatever convention you are choosing. – Trimok 10 hours ago 1

@user26143 : You can check this by writing F1−F2=F(1+F2+F4+...+F2n+...)=(1+F2+F4+...+F2n+...)F and 1−F2F=F−1(1−F2)=(1−F2)F−1 – Trimok 10 hours ago upvote flag Don't forget to edit the relevant information from this comment thread into the answer, and then you can flag the comments for deletion. – David Z♦ 4 hours ago

share|cite|improve this answer
How did you get $F^2$ term in your first line in the "Rigorous proof"? I tried to write the term explicitly from the second term in Eq. (3), $$\left( \frac{F}{1-F^2} \right)^{\mu\rho} \left( \frac{F}{1-F^2} \right)^{\sigma \nu} = F^{\mu}_{\lambda} \left( \frac{1}{1-F^2} \right)^{\lambda \rho} F^{\sigma}_{\eta} \left( \frac{1}{1-F^2} \right)^{\eta \nu} - {\delta}^{\sigma}_{\eta} \left( \frac{1}{1-F^2} \right)^{\lambda \rho} {\delta}^{\sigma}_{\eta} \left( \frac{1}{1-F^2} \right)^{\eta \nu} $$ The factors $F^{\mu}_{\lambda} $ and $ F^{\sigma}_{\eta} $ do not form $F^2$ by contracting indices? – user26143 Sep 1 '13 at 10:41
@user26143: There's neither a delta, nor an eta in my answer. Read it again. And the rigorous proof is equivalent to the non-rigorous one, I just don't let the indices take care of themselves. – centralcharge Sep 1 '13 at 10:44
I mean, how did you get $(F^2-1)^{\sigma \nu}$? I omitted the superscript ${\sigma \nu}$ previously. I am not saying if you have a delta/eta in your post, I tried to get your equation from my Eq.(3), but I cannot reach it. That is my step. – user26143 Sep 1 '13 at 10:45
@user26143 : you must be careful, there is an ambiguity with $\frac{A}{B}$, because it could be $B^{-1}A$ or $AB^{-1}$, and $\frac{B}{A}$,could be $A^{-1}B$ or $BA^{-1}$. However, in your case, it works in all cases, that is the inverse of $\frac{F}{1-F^2}$ is $\frac{1-F^2}{F}$, whatever convention you are choosing. – Trimok Sep 1 '13 at 19:04
@user26143 : You can check this by writing $\frac{F}{1-F^2} = F(1+F^2+F^4+...+F^{2n}+...) = (1+F^2+F^4+...+F^{2n}+...)F$ and $\frac{1-F^2}{F} = F^{-1}(1-F^2) = (1-F^2)F^{-1}$ – Trimok Sep 1 '13 at 19:08

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.