Proving Summation with Kronecker Delta and Levi-Civita

  • Thread starter Thread starter newton1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Delta
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the equation SUM(k) [E(ijk)E(lmk)] = d(il)d(jm) - d(im)d(jl) using the properties of the Kronecker delta and the Levi-Civita permutation symbol. The Kronecker delta, d(ij), equals 1 when i equals j and 0 otherwise, while the Levi-Civita symbol, E(ijk), indicates the parity of permutations of the indices. The proof involves expanding the summation using the definitions of E(ijk) and E(lmk), leading to a series of terms that can be simplified by treating certain components as constants during summation. Ultimately, the process demonstrates how these mathematical constructs interact to yield the desired result. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding the definitions and properties of the symbols involved in the proof.
newton1
Messages
151
Reaction score
0
i need help...:frown:
prove SUM(k) [E(ijk)E(lmk)]= d(il)d(jm) - d(im)d(jl)
where "d" is Kronecker delta symbol and "E" is permutation symbol or
Levi-Civita density
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
A clarification: the Kronecker delta, d(ij), is 1 if i= j, 0 otherwise.

The Levi-Civita permutation symbol, E(ijk) {real notation is "epsilon"), is 1 if ijk is an even permutation of 123, -1 if ijk is an odd permutation of 123, and 0 otherwise. While d(ij) is defined for all dimensions, E(ijk) implies that i, j, and k can only be 1, 2 ,3. For higher "dimensions" we would need more indices.

SUM(k) [E(ijk)E(lmk)]= E(ij1)E(lm1)+ E(ij2)E(lm2)+E(ij3)E(lm3)
 


To prove this summation using Kronecker delta and Levi-Civita, we can start by writing out the sum as:

SUM(k) [E(ijk)E(lmk)]

We can then expand the first permutation symbol using its definition:

E(ijk) = d(ij)k - d(ik)j

Substituting this into the original sum, we get:

SUM(k) [d(ij)k - d(ik)j]E(lmk)

Next, we can expand the second permutation symbol in a similar way:

E(lmk) = d(lm)k - d(lk)m

Substituting this into the sum, we get:

SUM(k) [d(ij)k - d(ik)j] [d(lm)k - d(lk)m]

Using the distributive property, we can expand this sum further:

SUM(k) d(ij)kd(lm)k - SUM(k) d(ij)kd(lk)m - SUM(k) d(ik)jd(lm)k + SUM(k) d(ik)jd(lk)m

Now, let's focus on each term separately. The first term is:

SUM(k) d(ij)kd(lm)k

Since we are summing over k, we can treat d(ij) and d(lm) as constants. This means we can pull them out of the sum:

d(ij)d(lm) SUM(k) k

The sum of k from 1 to n is simply n(n+1)/2. Therefore, this term simplifies to:

d(ij)d(lm) n(n+1)/2

Similarly, for the second term, we have:

SUM(k) d(ij)kd(lk)m

Again, we can pull out d(ij) and d(lk) as constants, leaving us with:

d(ij)d(lk) SUM(k) km

The sum of km from 1 to n is simply n(n+1)/2. Therefore, this term simplifies to:

d(ij)d(lk) n(n+1)/2

For the third term, we have:

SUM(k) d(ik)jd(lm)k

Following the same steps as before, we can pull out d(ik) and d(lm) as constants, leaving us with:

d(ik)d(lm) SUM(k)
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top