Consider a scalar field $\phi$ as a function of spacetime coordinates $x^\mu$. The four-gradient of $\phi$ is given by

\begin{equation} \frac{\partial \phi}{\partial x^\mu} = \left( \frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}, \frac{\partial \phi}{\partial x}, \frac{\partial \phi}{\partial y}, \frac{\partial \phi}{\partial z}\right) \end{equation}

I'm studying a little of classical field theory and in the topic os real scalar field, is commom to introduce four-gradients of these fields. My question is: The components of this four-gradient are not the components of a four-vector. For example, take the first component, and considering $t = t(x',t')$

\begin{align} \frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t} &= \frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t'}\frac{\partial t'}{\partial t} + \frac{\partial \phi}{\partial x'}\frac{\partial x'}{\partial t}\\ &= \gamma \left( \frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t'} - v \frac{\partial \phi}{\partial x'} \right) \end{align}

EDIT: I'm some books I've read, the four-gradient $\partial _\mu$ is defined as a four-vector, and since the D'alambertian operator $\Box = \partial _\mu \partial ^\mu$ is a lorentz invariant, the four-gradients must be four-vectors. But my computations give me this unsatisfactory result. Am I doing computational mistake or what? Please help me


The $4$-gradient is a $4$- vector.

Formally, when $x^\mu\to x'^\mu=\Lambda^\mu{}_\nu x^\nu$

$$ \begin{align*} \partial'_\mu &=\frac{\partial}{\partial x'^\mu}\\ &=\frac{\partial}{\partial (\Lambda^\mu {}_\nu x^\nu)}\\ \end{align*} $$ $\therefore$ $$ \begin{align*} \Lambda^\mu {}_\nu\partial'_\mu&=\partial_\nu\\ \end{align*} $$

which makes $\partial_\mu$ a 4 vector and is precisely what you are getting

which is not how the $0^{th}$ component of a four-vector should transform

It is. What you have derived is $\partial_\nu$ in terms of $\partial'_\mu$ which matches above.

This is equivalent to the transform of a 4 covector $$\partial'_\mu=\Lambda_\mu{}^\nu\partial_\nu$$ So, $$ \begin{align*} \frac{\partial}{\partial t'}&=\gamma\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial t}+v\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\right)\\ \frac{\partial}{\partial x'}&=\gamma\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial x}+v\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\right) \end{align*} $$ which leads to $$\frac{\partial}{\partial t}=\gamma\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial t'}-v\frac{\partial}{\partial x'}\right)$$ same as before

  • $\begingroup$ But my computations leads me to an inconsistence. Can you say where is my mistake? $\endgroup$ Feb 1 '20 at 23:03
  • $\begingroup$ @Lil'Gravity I have clarified with an edit $\endgroup$
    – lineage
    Feb 2 '20 at 0:02
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the explanation. I realize that I made confusion about the distinct elements "4-vector $A^\mu$" and a "4-covector A_\mu". The textbooks presents the 4-vectors as $A^\mu$. $\endgroup$ Feb 2 '20 at 0:19

The "gradient" you wrote is not a four vector (and that's not what should be called a gradient). What you have written is a four co-vector (i.e. a dual vector, which is a linear functional over the space of four-vectors). What you have written is technically the differential of the field $\phi$ which is an exact on-form:

$$d\phi = \frac{\partial\phi}{\partial x^{\mu}} \, dx^{\mu}$$

The gradient depends on an underlying Lorenzian (or Riemannian) metric $g_{\,\mu \nu}(x)$ tensor, with inverse tensor $g^{\,\mu \nu}(x)$, that establishes isomorphism between the space of vectors and co-vectors. I.e.

$$\big(\,\nabla \phi \,\big)^{\mu} = g^{\mu \nu}\, \frac{\partial \phi}{\partial x^{\nu}}$$ so when you change the coordinates, $x^{\mu} \mapsto \tilde{x}^{\mu}$, the inverse Lorenzian or Riemannian tensor changes as $$g^{\,\mu \nu} = \frac{\partial {x}^{\mu}}{\partial \tilde{x}^{\alpha}}\, \tilde{g}^{\,\alpha \beta}\, \frac{\partial {x}^{\nu}}{\partial \tilde{x}^{\beta}}$$ and the partial derivatives transform as $$\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial x^{\nu}} =\frac{\partial \tilde{x}^{\gamma}}{\partial {x}^{\nu}}\, \frac{\partial \phi}{\partial \tilde{x}^{\gamma}}$$ Consequently, the gradient transforms as a four-vector as follows: \begin{align} \big(\,\nabla \phi \,\big)^{\mu} &= g^{\mu \nu}\, \frac{\partial \phi}{\partial x^{\nu}} = \left(\frac{\partial {x}^{\mu}}{\partial \tilde{x}^{\alpha}}\, \tilde{g}^{\,\alpha \beta}\, \frac{\partial {x}^{\nu}}{\partial \tilde{x}^{\beta}} \right)\, \left(\frac{\partial \tilde{x}^{\gamma}}{\partial {x}^{\nu}}\, \frac{\partial \phi}{\partial \tilde{x}^{\gamma}}\right)\\ &= \frac{\partial {x}^{\mu}}{\partial \tilde{x}^{\alpha}}\, \tilde{g}^{\,\alpha \beta}\, \left(\frac{\partial {x}^{\nu}}{\partial \tilde{x}^{\beta}} \, \frac{\partial \tilde{x}^{\gamma}}{\partial {x}^{\nu}}\right)\, \frac{\partial \phi}{\partial \tilde{x}^{\gamma}}\\ &= \frac{\partial {x}^{\mu}}{\partial \tilde{x}^{\alpha}}\, \tilde{g}^{\,\alpha \beta}\, \left(\frac{\partial \tilde{x}^{\gamma}}{\partial {x}^{\nu}} \, \frac{\partial {x}^{\nu}}{\partial \tilde{x}^{\beta}} \right)\, \frac{\partial \phi}{\partial \tilde{x}^{\gamma}}\\ &= \frac{\partial {x}^{\mu}}{\partial \tilde{x}^{\alpha}}\, \tilde{g}^{\,\alpha \beta}\, \delta^{\gamma}_{\beta} \frac{\partial \phi}{\partial \tilde{x}^{\gamma}}\\ &= \frac{\partial {x}^{\mu}}{\partial \tilde{x}^{\alpha}}\, \tilde{g}^{\,\alpha \beta}\,\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial \tilde{x}^{\beta}}\\ &= \frac{\partial {x}^{\mu}}{\partial \tilde{x}^{\alpha}}\, \left(\tilde{g}^{\,\alpha \beta}\,\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial \tilde{x}^{\beta}}\right)\\ & = \frac{\partial {x}^{\mu}}{\partial \tilde{x}^{\alpha}}\, \big(\,\tilde{\nabla} \phi \,\big)^{\alpha} \end{align} where again, in the current $\tilde{x}^{\alpha}$, the gradient is $$\big(\,\tilde{\nabla} \phi \,\big)^{\alpha} = \tilde{g}^{\,\alpha \beta}\,\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial \tilde{x}^{\beta}}$$

In flat space-time, you have a Minkowskian constant tensor $\eta_{\mu \nu}$.


The four gradient is a four vector but it transforms covariantly, rather than contravariantly. This makes it a "covector".

It also has a contravariant form, obtained by multiplying it by the metric, which transforms like 4 four position or four momentum.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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