I've been unable to find any references for the lagrangian density in presence of matter. It's a lot easier to find this expressions in vacuum, but, when it comes to matter, I couldn't find any clear information. I mean, when we're referring to this equations: $$\begin{cases} \nabla \cdot \mathbf{E}=\large{\frac{\rho}{\epsilon_0}} \\ \\ \nabla \cdot \mathbf{B}=0 \\ \\ \nabla \times \mathbf{E}=-\large{\frac{\partial \mathbf{B}}{\partial t}} \\ \\ \nabla \times \mathbf{B}=\mu_0 \mathbf{J}+\large{\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial\mathbf{E}}{\partial t}} \end{cases}$$

I know the associated lagrangian density is:

$$\mathcal{L}=-\frac{1}{4\mu_0} F_{\mu \nu} F^{\mu \nu}-J_{\mu}A^{\mu}$$

Nevertheless, I was seeking how these other equations would be written in terms of the lagrangian formulation:

$$\begin{cases} \nabla \cdot \mathbf{D}=\rho \\ \\ \nabla \cdot \mathbf{B}=0 \\ \\ \nabla \times \mathbf{E}=-\large{\frac{\partial \mathbf{B}}{\partial t}} \\ \\ \nabla \times \mathbf{H}=\mathbf{J}+\large{\frac{\partial\mathbf{D}}{\partial t}} \end{cases}$$

And the only thing I got, is the link I leave below:


It says, " Separating the free currents from the bound currents, another way to write the Lagrangian density is as follows":

$$\mathcal{L}=-\frac{1}{4\mu_0} F_{\mu \nu} F^{\mu \nu}-J_{\mu}A^{\mu}+\frac{1}{2} F_{\mu \nu}\mathcal{M^{\mu \nu}}$$

Where $\mathcal{M^{\mu \nu}}$ is the magnetization-polarization tensor.

However, in this link, it's not explained why the term corresponding to the bound currents is the way it is, and I couldn't find anywhere information that clarifies my doubts.

So, my question is: Why the term corresponding to the bound currents is the way it is?


1 Answer 1

  1. The classical electrodynamics equations in matter is nonsense because the matter itself is a subject to the same equations. So the vacuum is the only option.
  2. The Maxwell's equations in vacuum contain 10 unknown functions (3E, 3H, 4J). We have 6 independent equations in Maxwell's equations. In order for theory to be definite we need to add 4 more equations. They called dynamics equations. It could've been Newton's dynamics but the problem is: Newton's dynamics originally formulated for a trajectory of a particle - it is not a field dynamics. It is not easy to close the system. After watching all attempts I've chosen to develop the simplest one. I introduced the invariant charge density term in Lagrange Density and got rid of interaction term (the magnetization polarization term equuals to zero in vacuum). See my article http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Mathematical%20Physics/Download/1741

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.