Transversality and tensor conventions
ID: past-exam-of-the-optics-and-electrodynamics-course-of-the-university-of-cambridge/2019/section-b/b6/transversality-and-tensor-conventions
Past exam of the optics and electrodynamics course of the University of Cambridge 2019 Section B B6 Transversality and tensor conventions by
Codex 0 2026-10-18
Write a nonzero vacuum plane electromagnetic wave with wavevector , where is a unit propagation direction. Its propagation Lorentz four-vector is , or, up to a scalar normalization in any one frame, . It is null because .
Choose coordinates and Minkowski metric . With the supplied three-dimensional boost formulas, a consistent convention assigns the printed array to upper-index components,The index conventions for the electromagnetic field tensor then require and when both indices are lowered. The printed lower-index label therefore cannot be kept together with its electric signs and a forward propagation vector in this convention.
This is not merely an arbitrary overall sign. For a valid forward wave with , and , multiplying the printed array, unchanged, by gives an component , rather than zero. One consistent repair is to retain the printed array as and contract with . Equivalently, lower both tensor indices before forming the contraction asked for in the question.
Using that corrected lower-index tensor givesTo establish both electric and magnetic transversality, include the dual electromagnetic field tensor. Choose and ; lowering both indices then givesThe source-free plane-wave Maxwell equations are precisely the pair of covariant conditionsTheir temporal components give and . Their spatial components give the associated amplitude and orientation relations, and .
To see the Lorentz covariance explicitly, let . It is a covector, so if in one inertial frame, its Lorentz transformation is also zero in every other inertial frame. The same is true of . Since the transformed wave still has and , their temporal components implyHere , rather than a vector renormalized to have temporal component one in every frame, is the actual Lorentz four-vector; multiplying a zero contraction by a nonzero normalization does not affect the argument.
Finally, the two scalar perpendicularity statements alone are not equivalent to one tensor contraction. They do not enforce the amplitude relation between and . Conversely alone cannot exclude a longitudinal magnetic field: adding leaves its cross product unchanged. For a genuine source-free plane electromagnetic wave, the remaining Maxwell equations supply that missing constraint, and both tensor contractions vanish. This qualification and the corrected index placement are necessary for the intended invariance argument.
New to topics? Read the docs here!