- #1
juanrga
- 476
- 0
I have studied Jackson, Landau, and Barut textbooks on electrodynamics, together with Weinberg's Gravitation and Cosmology textbook, and I find that the usual action
[itex]S = S_f + S_m + S_{mf}[/itex]
is inconsistent and not well-defined. For instance, what is the meaning of [itex]S_f[/itex]? A free-field term? Or an interacting-field term that diverges?
Moreover, the derivations of the energy-momentum tensors from the above action seem ad-hoc. For instance, Landau & Lifgarbagez just claim that during the derivation one must assume that the particles are non-interacting! That is, one must ignore the [itex]S_{mf}[/itex] term.
All of this mess is confirmed by papers as that by Feynman & Wheeler [1] and by Chubykalo & Smirnov-Rueda [2] where alternative actions are proposed to correct the deficiencies. However, I find still difficulties with those actions and no systematic procedure to get the corresponding energy-momentum tensors.
Does exist some well-defined and consistent action for electrodynamics leading to a well-defined and physically correct energy-momentum tensor?
[1] Rev. Mod. Phys. 1949: 21(3), 425.
[2] Phys. Rev. E 1996: 53(5), 5373. [Erratum] Phys. Rev. E 1997: 55(3), 3793.
[itex]S = S_f + S_m + S_{mf}[/itex]
is inconsistent and not well-defined. For instance, what is the meaning of [itex]S_f[/itex]? A free-field term? Or an interacting-field term that diverges?
Moreover, the derivations of the energy-momentum tensors from the above action seem ad-hoc. For instance, Landau & Lifgarbagez just claim that during the derivation one must assume that the particles are non-interacting! That is, one must ignore the [itex]S_{mf}[/itex] term.
All of this mess is confirmed by papers as that by Feynman & Wheeler [1] and by Chubykalo & Smirnov-Rueda [2] where alternative actions are proposed to correct the deficiencies. However, I find still difficulties with those actions and no systematic procedure to get the corresponding energy-momentum tensors.
Does exist some well-defined and consistent action for electrodynamics leading to a well-defined and physically correct energy-momentum tensor?
[1] Rev. Mod. Phys. 1949: 21(3), 425.
[2] Phys. Rev. E 1996: 53(5), 5373. [Erratum] Phys. Rev. E 1997: 55(3), 3793.
Last edited: