0
$\begingroup$

Consider the objects $$A_\mu, ~~F_{\mu\nu}:=\partial_\mu A_\nu-\partial_\nu A_\mu,$$ and the objects $$A:=A_\mu dx^\mu,~~F:=\frac{1}{2!}F_{\mu\nu} dx^\mu\wedge dx^\nu.$$ While reading it from Zee's book on Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell, I acquired the idea that the entities $A$ and $F$ defined above are examples of a 1-form and a 2-form respectively.

However, now going through Sean Carroll's book Spacetime and Geometry Section 2.9, I find that a $p$-form is defined as $(0,p)$ tensor that is completely antisymmetric. But if this definition is correct, then $F_{\mu\nu}=\partial_\mu A_\nu-\partial_\nu A_\mu$ is a 2-form not $F$. It also says that $\epsilon_{\mu\nu\sigma\rho}$ is a 4-form.

Please explain between $F_{\mu\nu}$ and $F$, what stands for a two-form.

$\endgroup$
1
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ The first F is not a tensor, it is an arrangement/display of components of a 2nd rank tensor in a coordinate basis. Your 2nd F is a tensor, a 2-form $\endgroup$
    – DanielC
    Commented Oct 15, 2021 at 5:11

3 Answers 3

3
$\begingroup$

In the physics literature it is quite common to casually refer to the components of a tensor as the tensor. The same practice is used for differential forms.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks @Qmechanic There are $(p,0)$ tensors, $(0,p)$ tensors and $(m,n)$ tensors. $p$-forms are same as $(0,p)$ tensors, and sometimes the components of $(0,p)$ tensors are referred to as $p$-forms. Am I right? $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 20, 2021 at 16:14
  • $\begingroup$ $\uparrow$ Yes. $\endgroup$
    – Qmechanic
    Commented Oct 20, 2021 at 17:35
  • $\begingroup$ @Qmechanic is that correct? I've often seen the $(0,1)$ and $(1,0)$ referred to as 2-forms rather than 1-forms, including on the Wiki article on Lorentz group representations. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 4, 2023 at 11:34
2
$\begingroup$

It's important to distinguish between a tensor and the components of a tensor. A (r,s) tensor is a multilinear map that takes r co vectors and s vectors, and maps them into the reals. In that case $dx^\mu$ takes a vector V and maps into the the reals, $dx^\mu(V) = V(x^\mu) =V^\mu$. Now here comes the tricky bit, $V^\mu$ is not a vector, but a component of a vector, i.e. a real number. Similarly, in your example, $F_{\mu\nu}$ and $A_\mu$ are real numbers, while $F$ and $A$ are a one and two form respectively.

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

$F$ is a (0,2) tensor, i.e. a bilinear map $F : V\times V \to K$ , where V is a vector field defined over field K. If $\{\partial_{\mu}\}$ be the basis vector for V and $\{dx^{\mu}\}$ be the corresponding dual basis vector satisfying $dx^a(\partial_b)=\delta^a_b$, then $F_{\mu\nu}=F(\partial_{\mu}, \partial_{\nu})$. If we are considering U(1) gauge theory, then $F\equiv dA$. So, $F_{\mu\nu}=dA(\partial_{\mu},\partial_{\nu})=\partial_{\mu}A_{\nu}-\partial_{\nu}A_{\mu}$ where we have used the definition of the exterior derivative of a 1-form $\omega$ : $d\omega (X,Y):=X(\omega(Y))-Y(\omega(X))-\omega([X,Y])$

$\endgroup$

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.