Comparing Tensor Double Dot Scalar Product Definitions

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the definitions of the tensor double dot scalar product, specifically comparing two different formulations as they relate to tensor calculus and finite element methods. The scope includes theoretical aspects and potential applications in mathematical physics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents two definitions of the tensor double dot scalar product: 1) \nabla \vec{u} \colon \nabla \vec{v} = u_{i,j} v_{j,i} and 2) \nabla \vec{u} \colon \nabla \vec{v} = u_{i,j} v_{i,j}, expressing a belief that the first is correct.
  • Another participant mentions the outer multiplication between vectors and provides an index notation definition for the dyadic product.
  • A participant notes that the first definition is more common but emphasizes that it is a matter of convention.
  • One participant questions the validity of the two definitions, suggesting that since they yield different results, one must be correct and the other wrong.
  • Another participant counters that the definitions are not wrong but simply different, providing examples of conventions that can lead to confusion in mathematical expressions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding which definition of the tensor double dot scalar product is correct, with some asserting that both are valid under different conventions. The discussion remains unresolved as to which definition should be preferred.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the dependence on conventions in tensor calculus and the potential for confusion arising from different definitions. There are unresolved questions about the implications of using one definition over the other.

dakg
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Ok I have seen the tensor double dot scalar product defined two ways and it all boils down to how the multiplication is defined. Does anyone know which is correct? I believe the first one is correct but I keep seeing the second one in various books on finite element methods.

1. \nabla \vec{u} \colon \nabla \vec{v} = u_{i,j} v_{j,i}

or

2. \nabla \vec{u} \colon \nabla \vec{v} = u_{i,j} v_{i,j}Thank you in advance,
dakg
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You mean outer multiplication between two vectors, right? The definition i have seen (using index notation) is, in D dimensions,

\vec{u} \otimes \vec{v}= a_{ij}=u_i v_j\;,\;1\leq i,j \leq D
 
sorry there is a \nabla missing

i'll edit it
 
i have it in there but it isn't printing, let me try here

\nabla \vec{u} \colon \nabla \vec{v}
 
The first one is more common, but it is a matter of convention.
 
Do you know why? I found the first one in a Lightfoot book on transport.

They make different results, so wouldn't one be correct and the other wrong?
 
Not wrong just different.
log(e)=1
log(10)=1
3*5+2=17
3*5+2=21
Here are examples of conventions that can lead to confusion.
The convention here (using dyadic product for an example) is
1) (ab):(cd)=(a.d)(b.c) the usual rule
2) (ab):(cd)=(a.c)(b.d) the other rule
The usual rule proably is choosen because of matrix algebra
ie to be the same as matrix product
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K