Understanding of Maxwell's Stress Tensor

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on understanding Maxwell's stress tensor, specifically the components of the electric and magnetic fields in the tensor equation. It clarifies that the squared terms for the electric and magnetic fields represent the dot product of the vector fields with themselves, leading to the expression E^2 = E_x^2 + E_y^2 + E_z^2. The inquiry reflects a desire for clarity on tensor notation and its implications in physics. Participants express that such questions are valid and important for deeper comprehension. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the significance of grasping the mathematical foundations of the stress tensor in electromagnetism.
vwishndaetr
Messages
86
Reaction score
0
Was a bit fuzzy as to whether this better fit HW or here, but since there really is no question associated with it, figured this made a bit more sense.

I have a couple basic questions about the stress tensor:

T_{ij} = \epsilon_0 \left( E_i E_j - \frac{1}{2} \delta_{ij} E^2 \right) + \frac{1}{\mu_0} \left( B_i B_j - \frac{1}{2} \delta_{ij} B^2 \right)

For the component electric and magnetic fields (denoted with "i" and "j" indices), they are what they are. What ever the indice at the time, that particular component fills it in. But for both the squared Electric and Magnetic Field terms, what is being squared? Is it the magnitude of the net field squared?

Might be a bit silly to be dealing with Tensors and asking such silly questions, but still want to know.

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It implicitly means the dot product of the vector field with itself.

E^2 = \mathbf{E}\cdot\mathbf{E}
 
Born2bwire said:
It implicitly means the dot product of the vector field with itself.

E^2 = \mathbf{E}\cdot\mathbf{E}

So it'd be,

{E^2} = \sqrt {{E_x}^2 + {E_y}^2 + {E_z}^2} \cdot \sqrt {{E_x}^2 + {E_y}^2 + {E_z}^2}

I feel so dumb asking this. Thanks again.
 
vwishndaetr said:
So it'd be,

{E^2} = \sqrt {{E_x}^2 + {E_y}^2 + {E_z}^2} \cdot \sqrt {{E_x}^2 + {E_y}^2 + {E_z}^2}

I feel so dumb asking this. Thanks again.

Or more simply just

{E^2} = {E_x}^2 + {E_y}^2 + {E_z}^2
 
Susskind (in The Theoretical Minimum, volume 1, pages 203-205) writes the Lagrangian for the magnetic field as ##L=\frac m 2(\dot x^2+\dot y^2 + \dot z^2)+ \frac e c (\dot x A_x +\dot y A_y +\dot z A_z)## and then calculates ##\dot p_x =ma_x + \frac e c \frac d {dt} A_x=ma_x + \frac e c(\frac {\partial A_x} {\partial x}\dot x + \frac {\partial A_x} {\partial y}\dot y + \frac {\partial A_x} {\partial z}\dot z)##. I have problems with the last step. I might have written ##\frac {dA_x} {dt}...
Thread 'Griffith, Electrodynamics, 4th Edition, Example 4.8. (Second part)'
I am reading the Griffith, Electrodynamics book, 4th edition, Example 4.8. I want to understand some issues more correctly. It's a little bit difficult to understand now. > Example 4.8. Suppose the entire region below the plane ##z=0## in Fig. 4.28 is filled with uniform linear dielectric material of susceptibility ##\chi_e##. Calculate the force on a point charge ##q## situated a distance ##d## above the origin. In the page 196, in the first paragraph, the author argues as follows ...
Back
Top