Calculating Curl With Index Notation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the curl of a vector using index notation and the Levi-Civita tensor. Participants explore the mathematical formulation and seek clarity on the application of these concepts in vector calculus.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the curl of a vector \( \vec{A} \) can be expressed as \( (\nabla \times \vec{A})_i = \epsilon_{ijk} \partial_j A_k \).
  • Others elaborate on the simplification of the Levi-Civita symbol \( \epsilon_{ijk} \), noting that it equals zero if any indices are the same and providing specific values for permutations of indices.
  • A participant provides a detailed breakdown of calculating each component of the curl, showing how to derive \( B_x \), \( B_y \), and \( B_z \) using the Levi-Civita tensor.
  • There is a discussion about the implicit summation convention and how it applies to the indices in the expression for curl.
  • One participant expresses difficulty in fully grasping the concepts despite having seen the calculations, indicating a need for further clarification.
  • Another participant checks their understanding of the index notation and the implications of setting specific indices in the Levi-Civita symbol.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the formulation of the curl using the Levi-Civita tensor, but there remains some uncertainty regarding the application and understanding of the notation and implicit sums.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express confusion about the implicit summation and the handling of indices, indicating that further clarification on these points may be necessary for complete understanding.

poonintoon
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Hi, does anyone know a link showing how to calculate curl with a Levi-Civita tensor. I can't figure it out but I am sure if I could see an actual example would be able to work out what is going on.
Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Isn't the curl of some vector, A, say (\nabla \times \vec{A})_i[/tex] just \epsilon_{ijk}\partial_j A_k ?
 
cristo said:
Isn't the curl of some vector, A, say (\nabla \times \vec{A})_i[/tex] just \epsilon_{ijk}\partial_j A_k ?
<br /> <br /> It is, but I can&#039;t find out how to use it.
 
cristo said:
Isn't the curl of some vector, A, say (\nabla \times \vec{A})_i[/tex] just \epsilon_{ijk}\partial_j A_k ?
<br /> <br /> <blockquote data-attributes="" data-quote="poonintoon" data-source="post: 1894763" class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch"> <div class="bbCodeBlock-title"> poonintoon said: </div> <div class="bbCodeBlock-content"> <div class="bbCodeBlock-expandContent js-expandContent "> It is, but I can&#039;t find out how to use it. </div> </div> </blockquote> Have you tried just writing it out?<br /> <br /> If A<sub>k</sub>= &lt;f(x,y,z), g(x,y,z),h(x,y,z)&gt; where x= x<sub>1</sub>, y= x<sub>2</sub>, z= x<sup>3[/sub], then \epsilon_{ijk}\partial_j A_k is:<br /> <br /> We can simplify some of the &quot;writing out&quot; by noting that \epsilon_{ijk}= 0 if any of i, j, k are the same, \epsilon_{123}= \epsilon_{231}= \epsilon{312}= 1 and \epsilon_{132}= \epsilon{213}= \epsilon{321}= -1. <br /> <br /> So for B= curl A, we have <br /> B_x= B_1= \epsilon_{123}\partial_2\ A_3+ \epsilon{132}\partial_3 A_2<br /> = \partial_2 A_3- \partial_3 A_2= \frac{\partial h}{\partial z}- \frac{\partial g}{\partial y}<br /> <br /> B_2= \epsilon_{213}\partial_1\ A_3+ \epsilon{231}\partial_3 A_1<br /> = -\partial_1 A_3+ \partial_3 A_1= \frac{\partial h}{\partial x}- \frac{\partial f}{\partial z}<br /> <br /> B_3= \epsilon_{312}\partial_1\ A_2+ \epsilon{321}\partial_2 A_1<br /> = \partial_1 A_2- \partial_2 A_1= \frac{\partial g}{\partial x}- \frac{\partial f}{\partial y}<br /> which are, of course, the usual formulas for curl A.</sup>
 
So you have
\nabla\times\vec{A}=\partial_iA_j\hat{u_k}\epsilon_{ijk}.

So to get the x component of the curl, for example, plug in x for k, and then there is an implicit sum for i and j over x,y,z (but all the terms with repeated indices in the Levi-Cevita symbol go to 0)

(\nabla\times\vec{A})_x = \partial_yA_z\epsilon_{yzx} + \partial_zA_y\epsilon_{zyx}=\frac{\partial A_z}{\partial y} - \frac{\partial A_y}{\partial z}
 
HallsofIvy said:
Have you tried just writing it out?

We can simplify some of the "writing out" by noting that \epsilon_{ijk}= 0 if any of i, j, k are the same, \epsilon_{123}= \epsilon_{231}= \epsilon{312}= 1 and \epsilon_{132}= \epsilon{213}= \epsilon{321}= -1.

So for B= curl A, we have
B_x= B_1= \epsilon_{123}\partial_2\ A_3+ \epsilon{132}\partial_3 A_2
= \partial_2 A_3- \partial_3 A_2= \frac{\partial h}{\partial z}- \frac{\partial g}{\partial y}

Thanks that's what I wanted, I thought once I had seen this I would be able to figure it out, unfortunately it's just not clicking for me.

Can I check I have the right thinking...
\epsilon_{ijk}\partial_j A_k

For B1 you set i to 1. then that leaves two combinations for partial_j A_k
partial_2 A_3 or partial_3 A_2

Then you can have any tensor as long as i is 1 i.e epsilon_{123}\ \epsilon_{112}\ \epsilon_{111}
but obviously any with two 1's in are zero.

I think this gives the right answer but I should be thinking more in terms of implicit sums than what combination I have left.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
823
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K