1
$\begingroup$

In a particular reference frame with coordinates $x^\mu$, we can define a current density 4-vector $J^\mu=(c\rho,\vec{J})$ where $\rho$ is the charge density and $\vec{J}$ is the current density.

The continuity equation in this frame is then $$\frac{\partial J^\mu}{\partial x^\mu}=0.$$

How can it be shown that this equation holds in a Lorentz boosted frame with coordinates $x'^\mu=\Lambda^\mu_\nu x ^\nu$, i.e. $$\frac{\partial J'^\mu}{\partial x'^\mu}=0$$ is true?

$\endgroup$

2 Answers 2

6
$\begingroup$

From $J'^\mu=\Lambda^\mu_\nu J^\nu$ take derivative on both sides $$\frac{\partial J'^\mu}{\partial x'^\mu}=\Lambda^\mu_\nu \frac{\partial J^\nu}{\partial x'^\mu}$$ Note that $\frac{\partial}{\partial x'^\mu}=\Lambda^\sigma_\mu\frac{\partial}{\partial x^\sigma}$ Then we have $$\frac{\partial J'^\mu}{\partial x'^\mu}=\Lambda^\mu_\nu \frac{\partial J^\nu}{\partial x'^\mu}=\Lambda^\mu_\nu\Lambda^\sigma_\mu\frac{\partial J^\nu}{\partial x^\sigma}=\delta^\sigma_\nu\frac{\partial J^\nu}{\partial x^\sigma}=\frac{\partial J^\nu}{\partial x^\nu}=0$$

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

Generally \begin{align} &\texttt{The 4-gradient contravariant vector operator} \nonumber\\ & \qquad \qquad \qquad \partial^{\mu}\boldsymbol{\equiv}\dfrac{\partial }{\partial x_{\mu}}\boldsymbol{=}\left(\dfrac{\partial }{\partial x^{0}}\,,\boldsymbol{-\nabla}\right) \tag{01a}\label{01a}\\ &\texttt{The 4-gradient covariant vector operator} \nonumber\\ &\qquad \qquad \qquad \partial_{\mu}\boldsymbol{\equiv}\dfrac{\partial }{\partial x^{\mu}}\boldsymbol{=}\left(\dfrac{\partial }{\partial x^{0}}\,,\boldsymbol{+\nabla}\right) \tag{01b}\label{01b} \end{align} The 4-divergence of a 4-vector $A^{\mu}\boldsymbol{=}\left(A^{0},\mathbf{A}\right),A_{\mu}\boldsymbol{=}\left(A^{0},\boldsymbol{-}\mathbf{A}\right) $ is the invariant \begin{equation} \partial^{\mu}A_{\mu}\boldsymbol{=}\partial_{\mu}A^{\mu}\boldsymbol{=}\dfrac{\partial A^{0} }{\partial x^{0}}\boldsymbol{+\nabla\cdot}\mathbf{A} \tag{02}\label{02} \end{equation}

$=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=$

Note : May be in the future you ask yourself if the converse of \eqref{02} is true. No, it's not : if $A^{\mu}\boldsymbol{=}\left(A^{0},\mathbf{A}\right)$ is a 4-dimensional quantity then \begin{equation} \partial_{\mu}A^{\mu}\boldsymbol{=}\texttt{invariant}\quad \boldsymbol{=\!\ne\!\Rightarrow}\quad A^{\mu}\boldsymbol{=}\texttt{contravariant Lorentz 4-vector} \tag{03}\label{03} \end{equation}

$-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!-\!\!$

Counter example

Consider that $Y^{\mu}\left(\mathbf{x},t\right)\boldsymbol{=}\left[\!\!\left[ Y^{0}\left(\mathbf{x},t\right),\mathbf{Y}\left(\mathbf{x},t\right)\right]\!\!\right]$ is a (contravariant) 4-vector function of the space-time coordinates $\left(\mathbf{x},t\right)$. According to equation \eqref{02} its 4-divergence is invariant \begin{equation} \partial_{\mu}Y^{\mu}\boldsymbol{=}\dfrac{\partial Y^{0} }{\partial x^{0}}\boldsymbol{+\nabla\cdot}\mathbf{Y}\boldsymbol{=}\texttt{invariant} \tag{04}\label{04} \end{equation} Now consider a 4-dimensional vector $\rm a^{\mu}\boldsymbol{=}\left(a^{0},\mathbf{a}\right)\boldsymbol{=}\left(a^{0},a^{1},a^{2},a^{3}\right)$ with components 4 arbitrary real numbers constants, that is not depending on the space-time coordinates $\left(\mathbf{x},t\right)$ and form the 4-dimensional vector \begin{equation} A^{\mu}\boldsymbol{=}Y^{\mu}\boldsymbol{+}\rm a^{\mu} \tag{05}\label{05} \end{equation} Then \begin{equation} \partial_{\mu}A^{\mu}\boldsymbol{=}\partial_{\mu}Y^{\mu}\boldsymbol{+}\overbrace{\partial_{\mu}\rm a^{\mu}}^{0}\boldsymbol{=}\partial_{\mu}Y^{\mu}\boldsymbol{=}\texttt{invariant} \tag{06}\label{06} \end{equation} But $A^{\mu}$ as defined by equation \eqref{05} in not a 4-vector due mainly to the arbitrariness of $\rm a^{\mu}$.

$\endgroup$
5
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ To show that the 4 divergence of a 4 vector is invariant under coordinate transformations, we still have to use Frank's answer, right? $\endgroup$
    – TaeNyFan
    Commented Dec 12, 2020 at 5:14
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @TaeNyFan : Yes, precisely. The proof is given in Frank's answer that's why I didn't post the same one. $\endgroup$
    – Voulkos
    Commented Dec 12, 2020 at 8:10
  • $\begingroup$ @Frobenius Could you give a counter example to your note? I remember this proof I saw a while ago (I might be wrong, I haven't checked) but it said something like: if $B_\mu A^\mu$ is a Lorentz invariant, and $B_\mu$ transforms like a four-vector, then $A^\mu$ must be a four-vector. Are you saying that that doesn't hold here since in our case the "$B_\mu$" is an operator $\partial_\mu$? Or is the "theorem" I've stated wrong? $\endgroup$
    – Philip
    Commented Dec 13, 2020 at 8:09
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Philip : I think you refer to this post here Proving an object is a 4-vector given its inner product with a 4-vector is a scalar. Note that the condition $B_\mu A^\mu$ to be a Lorentz invariant with one only specific 4-vector $B_\mu$ it's not sufficient for $A^\mu$ to be a 4-vector. It's necessary the condition $B_\mu A^\mu$ to be a Lorentz invariant with any arbitrary 4-vector $B_\mu$. I added a Counter example in my answer. $\endgroup$
    – Voulkos
    Commented Dec 13, 2020 at 10:14
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Ah! Very interesting, thank you! $\endgroup$
    – Philip
    Commented Dec 13, 2020 at 10:25

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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