Writing Tensor Equations in Matrix Form

lugita15
Messages
1,553
Reaction score
15
I'm trying to express the tensor equation F'^{\mu\nu}=\Lambda^{\mu}_{\sigma}\Lambda^{\nu}_{ \rho }F^{\sigma\rho} in matrix form. Here the indices range from 0 to 3, so we need 4 by 4 matrices. Let F', F, and \Lambda be the matrices associated with the tensors appearing in our equation. Which of the following is the correct matrix translation of the tensor equation?

F'=\Lambda F \Lambda

F'=\Lambda \Lambda F

F'=\Lambda^{\top} F \Lambda

F'=\Lambda F \Lambda^{\top}

Or something else entirely?

I tried testing some of these out on the actual four-by-four matrices, but the algebra got too cumbersome. Usually when I figure out what order to put things in and where to put the transposes, I'm in a situation where I'm dealing with matrices and vectors, so that if you put it in the wrong order then the numbers of rows and columns don't match up. But in this case everything is four-by-four, so there is plenty of room for error.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thank You in Advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
lugita15 said:
I'm trying to express the tensor equation F'^{\mu\nu}=\Lambda^{\mu}_{\sigma}\Lambda^{\nu}_{ \rho }F^{\sigma\rho} in matrix form.

F'=\Lambda^{\top} F \Lambda

F'=\Lambda F \Lambda^{\top}

It will be one of these two, depending on how you decide to map your tensors to matrices.

You see, a tensor and a matrix are not quite the same thing. A matrix is most naturally thought of as a "mixed" tensor, with one index up and one down: M^a{}_b. Then the matrix product is quite natural to write:

M^a{}_c = K^a{}_b L^b{}_c

On the other hand, a tensor with two "up" indices is technically considered a column vector whose elements are column vectors. However, the multiplication algorithm will end up being the same as matrix multiplication. To translate it to matrices, you just need to follow the indices carefully:

\Lambda^a{}_c \Lambda^b{}_d F^{cd} = \Lambda^a{}_c F^{cd} \Lambda^b{}_d = \Lambda^a{}_c F^{cd} (\Lambda^\top)_d{}^b
where in the last step, we take the transpose because we need to switch the order of b and d to make it look like a matrix product. So we can write

F' = \Lambda F \Lambda^\top
provided we interpret the first index of F as a row index, and the second as a column index.

However, you should be careful with this notation to be clear what you mean. If we had a mixed tensor G^a{}_b, then in matrix notation its transformation would be

G' = \Lambda G \Lambda^{-1}
For the pure "up" tensor F^{ab}, the most mathematically-correct way to write its transformation law is

F' = (\Lambda \otimes \Lambda) \cdot F
where now F is unfolded into a single column vector with n \times n entries.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
Back
Top