5
$\begingroup$

In the T. Sakurai paper cited below, page 209, the author discusses how the magnetic field can be written in terms to the cross-product $$ \vec B = \vec\nabla \chi \times \vec\nabla \eta,$$ for two scalar potentials $\chi$ and $\eta$.

My question: is this generalizable to higher dimensions and higher forms? In particular, in $D$ dimensions, can I always represent a closed $p$-form $d\omega$ by $$ d\omega = d\chi_1 \wedge\cdots\wedge d\chi_p ,$$ or is there somehow something special about the magnetic field case?

Further if this is not generically true, what are necessary/ sufficient conditions for it to hold?

Edit: I originally came across this claim about magnetic fields here: https://arxiv.org/abs/1005.3977. In this paper, the author cites the work: Sakurai T., "A New Approach to the Force-Free Field and Its Application to the Magnetic Field of Solar Active Regions," Pub. Ast. Soc. Japan, Vol. 31, 209, 1979.

$\endgroup$
6
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ Could you add some more context, for those who do not have a copy of Sakurai on hand? $\endgroup$
    – J. Murray
    Commented Oct 8, 2021 at 16:30
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ .. and which Sakurai? Title and edition please. $\endgroup$
    – NickD
    Commented Oct 8, 2021 at 17:08
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Can you work out the Clebsch representation for solenoidal fields in 4d? $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 8, 2021 at 17:27
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ about the second question on exact p-form, refer to de-Rham cohomology en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Rham_cohomology $\endgroup$
    – KP99
    Commented Oct 8, 2021 at 18:11
  • $\begingroup$ Construction of Monge/Clebsch potentials need not refer to fluid dynamics papers. Nothing is special to the magnetic field. The decomposition holds for all solenoidal fields. I suspect your conjecture is correct, but I don't know how to construct the (scalar) potentials for D=4, the way construction is standard for D=3. Perhaps the MSE is friendlier to this type of question. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 8, 2021 at 19:43

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

Here is a partial answer. Let $B$ be a closed $p$-form magnetic field strength in $D$ spatial dimensions with $p\geq 1$. OP is then essentially asking if $B$ is can be written locally$^1$ as $$ B~=~\mathrm{d}\chi_1\wedge\ldots \wedge\mathrm{d}\chi_p ~?\tag{1} $$

From Poincare Lemma we know that there exists a locally defined $(p\!-\!1)$-form magnetic gauge potential $A$, so that $B=\mathrm{d}A$.

Eq. (1) is clearly possible with $\chi_1=A$ if $p=1$, so let's assume $p\geq 2$ from now on. Then $A\to A +\mathrm{d}\lambda$ has a $(p\!-\!2)$-form gauge symmetry $\lambda$.

Let us try to count DOF. The $p$-form $B$ has at least $$\begin{pmatrix} D \cr p\!-\!1 \end{pmatrix}-\begin{pmatrix} D \cr p\!-\!2 \end{pmatrix}~=~\begin{pmatrix} D\!-\!1 \cr p\!-\!1 \end{pmatrix}\tag{2}$$ DOF, which should not be bigger than the $p$ DOF on the rhs. of eq. (1). This is generically only possible if

  1. $B$ is dual to a vector field, i.e. $p=D-1.$

    • The case $p=2$ follows from Darboux' theorem/the Clebsch representation, cf. an above comment by Cosmas Zachos.

    • In the case $p\geq 3$, the gaugesymmetry $\lambda\to \lambda +\mathrm{d}\xi$ has a $(p\!-\!3)$-form gauge-for-gauge symmetry $\xi$, so a more precise counting shows that $B$ actually has more than $p$ DOF, i.e. eq. (1) is generically not possible.

  2. $B$ is a top-form with 1 DOF, i.e. $p=D$.

    • The case $p=2$ follows from Darboux' theorem.

--

$^1$ The corresponding global problem can carry additional topological obstructions.

$\endgroup$

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.